Systems and methods for intra-operative image analysis

ABSTRACT

A system and method that acquire (i) at least a reference image including one of a preoperative image of a surgical site with skeletal and articulating bones and a contralateral image on an opposite side of the patient from the surgical site, and (ii) at least an intraoperative image of the site after an implant has been affixed to the articulating bone. The system preferably generates at least one reference stationary point on at least the skeletal bone in the reference image and at least one intraoperative stationary point on at least the skeletal bone in the intraoperative image. The location of the implant is identified in the intraoperative image, preferably including the position of first and second centers of rotation, which are digitally represented and copied into the reference image to analyze at least one of offset and length differential.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/974,225 filed 18 Dec. 2015, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,433,914, which is a continuation-in-part application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/630,300 filed 24 Feb. 2015, also referred to as “parent application”, and claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/944,520 filed 25 Feb. 2014, U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/948,534 filed 5 Mar. 2014, U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/980,659 filed 17 Apr. 2014, U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/016,483 filed 24 Jun. 2014, U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/051,238 filed 16 Sep. 2014, U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/080,953 filed 17 Nov. 2014, and U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/105,183 filed 19 Jan. 2015, all of which are incorporated by reference herein in their entireties.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The invention relates to analysis of images of features within a patient and more particularly to accurately analyzing such images during surgery.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Orthopaedic surgeons and other healthcare professionals commonly rely on surgical guidance techniques that can be broadly classified in two categories: pre-operative digital templating or training systems that enable pre-surgical planning, and computer-assisted navigation systems providing intra-operative guidance for placement and movement of surgical instruments within a patient. There are benefits to both of these technologies, but each has respective limitations.

Preoperative digital templating techniques enable preoperative surgical planning by utilizing digital or hard copy radiographic images or similar X-ray-type, scaled according to an object of known size. Commonly, a spherical ball marker of known size is placed between the legs or next to the hip of a patient undergoing hip surgery so that it appears in the image; the ball marker is then utilized as a reference feature for image scaling. This preoperative scaling technique has inherent limitations to accuracy because it assumes that the bones within a patient and the surface ball marker will magnify at the same ratio. Commonly, the surgeon will realize during the surgery that this scale factor is inaccurate, due to deviations in magnification ratios, rendering the preoperative template ineffective for intraoperative decision making. For emergency cases such as hip fractures, preoperative digital templating often cannot be utilized, because the X-ray images are taken in a hospital setting without utilizing a ball marker or other scaling device.

Surgeons also have the option of utilizing computer-assisted navigation systems which provide intraoperative guidance. The purported benefits of computer navigation include reduction of outliers and adverse outcomes related to intraoperative positioning of surgical hardware. For example, computer navigation is utilized in hip replacement surgery to add precision to implant positioning by providing data on functional parameters such as leg length and offset changes during surgery.

Despite obvious clinical benefit, these systems have had limited adoption due to their expense, the learning curve and training requirements for surgeons and, for some systems, the additional procedure and time associated with hardware insertion into the patient. These adoption barriers have limited the use of computer assisted navigation to an extremely small percentage of overall hip arthroplasty surgeries. The surgeons that do not use these systems are limited to traditional techniques that are generally based on visual analysis and surgeon experience. However, these techniques are inconsistent, often leading to outliers in functional parameters which may affect patient satisfaction and implant longevity.

Details of one such technique, specifically used in a minimally invasive hip arthroplasty technique referred to as the direct anterior approach, are mentioned in the description of a total hip arthroplasty surgery, by Matta et al. in “Single-incision Anterior Approach for Total hip Arthroplasty on an Orthopaedic Table”, Clinical Ortho. And Related Res. 441, pp. 115-124 (2005). The intra-operative technique described by Matta et al. is time-consuming and has a high risk of inaccuracy due to differences in rotation, magnification and/or scaling of various images. The high risk of inaccurate interpretation using this technique has limited its utility in guiding surgical decision making.

What appears to be a software implementation of this technique is described by Penenberg et al. in U.S. Patent Publication No. 2014/0378828, which is a continuation-in-part application of U.S. Pat. No. 8,831,324 by Penenberg. While the use of a computer system may facilitate some aspects of this technique, the underlying challenges to the technique are consistent with the challenges to Matta's approach, and limit the system's potential utility.

There are various other examples of where intra-operative guidance systems could improve quality of patient care in orthopaedics through the reduction of outliers. One such example is in the treatment of peritrochanteric hip fractures. The selection of the proper implant and associated neck-shaft angle is often incompletely evaluated by the surgeon and implant representative utilizing conventional techniques. Furthermore, variations in placement of screws and other fixation devices and implants can significantly alter patient outcomes in treatment of these fractures. These variations and resulting outcomes are analyzed by Baumgaertner et al. in “The Value of the Tip-Apex Distance in Predicting Failure of Fixation of Peritrochanteric Fractures of the Hip”, J. Bone Joint Surg. 77-A No. 7, pp. 1058-1064 (1995). Other techniques relating to femoral fractures, including measurement of tip apex distance and screw position, are discussed by Bruijin et al. in “Reliability of Predictors for Screw Cutout in Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures”, J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 94, pp. 1266-72 (2012).

Proper reduction of fractures, that is, proper alignment of bones during surgery, often leads to more consistent patient outcomes, and intraoperative analysis of such reductions is incompletely evaluated currently because of the lack of non-invasive technologies that enable intraoperative analysis. One example is in the treatment of distal radius fractures. As referenced by Mann et al, “Radiographic evaluation of the wrist: what does the hand surgeon want to know?” Radiology, 184(1), pp 15-24 (1992), accurate restoration of certain parameters, such as radial inclination, radial length and Palmar Slope or Tilt, during the treatment of distal radius fractures is important. Currently, intraoperative images are utilized by surgeons, but there is no ability to readily analyse these parameters and form comparative analysis to normal anatomy.

Given the inherent scaling limitations of preoperative surgical planning and adoption barriers of current intraoperative computer navigation systems, an opportunity exists for a system and method that provides accurate intraoperative guidance and data, but without the barriers to adoption and invasive hardware requirements of traditional computer-assisted navigation.

It is therefore desirable to have a system and method to effectively analyze images intra-operatively using comparative anatomical features, to enhance patient quality of care by providing accurate intra-operative guidance and data.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

An object of the present invention is to provide a system and method to accurately and effectively analyze and/or perform calculations on images of anatomical features and/or implants such as prosthetic devices during surgery.

Another object of the present invention is to provide image analysis and feedback information to enable more accurate planning, better fracture reduction, and/or optimal implant selection during the surgery.

Yet another object of the present invention is to capture and preserve a digital record of patient results for data collection and quality improvements in surgical procedures.

A still further object of the present invention is to improve the outcome of bone repositioning, fracture repair, and/or fixation within a patient.

This invention results from the realization that offset and length differential of an implant having at least one center of rotation can be accurately estimated during surgery by establishing at least one stationary point on the skeletal bone and at the center of rotation in an intraoperative image, aligning a digital implant representation with the implant, and then copying and positioning the digital representation in at least one reference image including one of (a) a preoperative image of the surgical site and (b) a contralateral image on an opposite side of the patient from the surgical site. Another realization is that changes in offset and length differential can be estimated based on selected alternative changes in at least one dimension of the implant for potential alternative implants.

This invention features a system and method that acquire (i) at least one reference image including one of a preoperative image of a surgical site with skeletal and articulating bones and a contralateral image on an opposite side of the patient from the surgical site, and (ii) at least an intraoperative image of the site after an implant has been affixed to the articulating bone. The system and/or method generates at least one reference stationary point on at least the skeletal bone in the reference image and at least one intraoperative stationary point on at least the skeletal bone in the intraoperative image, such as a tear drop, or other feature associated with a pelvic bone of a patient. The location of the implant is identified in the intraoperative image, including the position of first and second centers of rotation, which are co-located in the intraoperative image. At least a first digital implant representation is aligned with the skeletal component and with at least the intraoperative stationary point, and (ii) at least a second digital implant representation is aligned with the articulating bone component and at least one point, such as a landmark point on the greater trochanter of a femur, on the articulating bone. The digital representations are copied and positioned in the reference image in an equivalent location relative to at least the reference stationary point and the articulating bone to determine the position of the first and second centers of rotation relative to each other in the reference image. Any differences between the locations of the first and second centers of rotation in the reference image are utilized to analyze at least one of offset and length differential.

In one system embodiment, the system includes a memory, a user interface including a display capable of providing at least visual guidance to a user of the system, and a processor, with the processor executing a program performing at least the steps listed above and described in more detail below. In some embodiments for the system and/or method, analyzing includes generating a vector having its origin at the reference stationary point and its terminal point at the first center of rotation. In certain embodiments, identifying includes determining a longitudinal axis for the second digital implant representation and analyzing includes utilizing a difference in spacing (i) perpendicular to the longitudinal axis to calculate offset and (ii) parallel to the longitudinal axis to calculate length differential. In one embodiment, the pelvis of the patient is selected as the skeletal bone and a femur is selected as the articulating bone, and the skeletal component of the implant is an acetabular cup and the articulating bone component includes a femoral stem having a shoulder, and the reference stationary point and the intraoperative stationary point are generated to have a known location relative to an obturator foramen of the patient, such as the tear drop. In one embodiment, the point on the articulating bone is identified to have a known location relative to the greater trochanter on the femur of the patient.

This invention also features a system to analyze images at a surgical site within a patient, the surgical site including at least a first, skeletal bone and a second, articulating bone that articulates with the skeletal bone at a joint, the system including an image selection module capable of acquiring (i) at least a first, reference image including one of a preoperative image of the surgical site and a contralateral image on an opposite side of the patient from the surgical site, and (ii) at least a second, intraoperative image of the site after an implant has been affixed to the articulating bone. The implant has at least a skeletal component with a first center of rotation and an articulating bone component having a second center of rotation, the first and second centers of rotation being co-located in the intraoperative image. The system optionally includes a landmark identification module capable of receiving the reference and intraoperative images and generating at least one reference stationary point on at least the skeletal bone in the reference image and at least one intraoperative stationary point on at least the skeletal bone in the intraoperative image. A templating module is capable of (a) identifying the location of the implant in the intraoperative image, including the position of the first and second centers of rotation, and aligning (i) at least a first digital implant representation with the skeletal component and with at least the intraoperative stationary point, and (ii) at least a second digital implant representation with the articulating bone component and at least one point on the articulating bone, and (b) copying the first and second digital representations and positioning them in the reference image in an equivalent location relative to at least the reference stationary point and the articulating bone to determine the position of the first and second centers of rotation relative to each other in the reference image. An analysis module is capable of utilizing any differences between the locations of the first and second centers of rotation in the reference image to analyze at least one of offset and length differential of at least one of the articulating bone and the implant in the intraoperative image.

In some embodiments, the reference and intraoperative images are provided by the image selection module to the data input module in a digitized format. In certain embodiments, the templating module positions the first digital representation in the reference image relative to the reference stationary point according to at least an intraoperative vector calculation utilizing at least the intraoperative stationary point relative to the first center of rotation and a reference vector calculation utilizing at least the reference stationary point relative to the first center of rotation. In one embodiment, the reference vector calculation replicates the intraoperative vector calculation. In a number of embodiments, the landmark identification module further generates at least a reference landmark point on at least one anatomical feature on the articulating bone in the reference image and at least an intraoperative landmark point on at least that anatomical feature on the articulating bone in the intraoperative image and, in one embodiment, at least one of the templating module and the analysis module utilizes the landmark points to assist alignment of the second digital implant representation on the articulating bone in both of the reference and intraoperative images.

In certain embodiments, the templating module selects a fixed point on the second digital implant representation and the analysis module is capable of estimating changes in offset and length differential based on selected alternative changes in at least one dimension of the implant for alternative implants, each with a similar fixed point, to be considered by a user of the system as a replacement for the implant in the intraoperative image. In some embodiments, the reference image and the intraoperative image are at least one of rotated, aligned and scaled relative to each other prior to the templating module copying the digital representation and positioning it in the reference image. In one embodiment, the landmark identification module generates at least one other stationary point on the skeletal bone in the reference image to establish a reference stationary base and at least one other stationary point on the skeletal bone in the intraoperative image to establish an intraoperative stationary base, and the analysis module utilizes the reference and intraoperative stationary bases to accomplish at least one of image rotation, image alignment and image scaling. In another embodiment, the analysis module provides at least relative scaling of one of the reference and intraoperative images to match the scaling of the other of the reference and intraoperative images. In yet another embodiment, the analysis module utilizes at least one object of known dimension in at least one of the reference and intraoperative images to provide absolute scaling to at least that image.

This invention further features a system analyze images at a surgical site within a patient, the surgical site including at least a first, skeletal bone and a second, articulating bone that articulates with the skeletal bone at a joint, the system including an image selection module capable of acquiring (i) at least one digitized reference image including one of a preoperative image of the surgical site and a contralateral image on an opposite side of the patient from the surgical site, and (ii) at least one digitized intraoperative image of the site after an implant has been affixed to the articulating bone, the implant having at least a skeletal component with a first center of rotation and an articulating bone component having a second center of rotation, the first and second centers of rotation being co-located in the intraoperative image. The system also includes a templating module capable of (a) identifying the location of the implant in the intraoperative image and aligning at least one of (i) at least a first digital implant representation with the skeletal component and with at least one intraoperative stationary point on at least the skeletal bone, and (ii) at least a second digital implant representation with the articulating bone component and at least one point on the articulating bone, and (b) copying at least one of the first and second digital representations and positioning them in the reference image in an equivalent location relative to at least one of (A) a reference stationary point on at least the skeletal bone and (B) the articulating bone, respectively, in the reference image. The system further includes an analysis module capable of utilizing any differences between the locations of at least one of the first and second digital implant representations in the reference image to analyze at least one of offset and length differential of at least one of the articulating bone and the implant in the intraoperative image. The templating module selects a fixed point on the second digital implant representation and the analysis module is capable of estimating changes in offset and length differential based on selected alternative changes in at least one dimension of the implant for alternative implants, each with a similar fixed point, to be considered by a user of the system as a replacement for the implant in the intraoperative image.

In one embodiment, the system further includes a landmark identification module capable of receiving the reference and intraoperative images and generating the at least one reference stationary point on at least the skeletal bone in the reference image and the at least one intraoperative stationary point on at least the skeletal bone in the intraoperative image.

This invention still further features a method for analyzing images to optimize the restoration of orthopaedic functionality at a surgical site within a patient, the surgical site including at least a first, skeletal bone and a second, articulating bone that articulates with the skeletal bone at a joint, the method including the steps of acquiring (i) at least one digitized reference image including one of a preoperative image of the surgical site and a contralateral image on an opposite side of the patient from the surgical site, and (ii) at least one digitized intraoperative image of the site after an implant has been affixed to the articulating bone, the implant having at least a skeletal component with a first center of rotation and an articulating bone component having a second center of rotation, the first and second centers of rotation being co-located in the intraoperative image. The method includes identifying the location of the implant in the intraoperative image and aligning at least one of (i) at least a first digital implant representation with the skeletal component and with at least one intraoperative stationary point on at least the skeletal bone, and (ii) at least a second digital implant representation with the articulating bone component and at least one point on the articulating bone. At least one of the first and second digital representations are copied and positioned in the reference image in an equivalent location relative to at least one of (A) a reference stationary point on at least the skeletal bone and (B) the articulating bone, respectively, in the reference image. Any differences between the locations of at least one of the first and second centers of rotation in the reference image are utilized to analyze at least one of offset and length differential of at least one of the articulating bone and the implant in the intraoperative image. A fixed point on the second digital implant representation is selected, and changes in offset and length differential are estimated based on selected alternative changes in at least one dimension of the implant for alternative implants, each with a similar fixed point, to be considered by a user of the system as a replacement for the implant in the intraoperative image.

In an embodiment, one or more computers perform a method for analyzing images to optimize the restoration of orthopaedic functionality at a surgical site within a patient. The surgical site includes at least a portion of both a skeletal bone and an articulating bone that articulates with respect to the skeletal bone at a joint. The method includes acquiring a preoperative image of the surgical site and acquiring an intraoperative image of the site after an initial implant has been implanted. The initial implant includes a skeletal component and an articulating bone component. The skeletal bone component is secured to the skeletal bone and has a first center of rotation. Likewise, the articulating bone component is secured to the articulating bone and has a second center of rotation. In addition, the first and second centers of rotation are co-located in the intraoperative image.

The method further includes generating a first digital landmark on the skeletal bone in both the intraoperative and preoperative images; generating a second digital landmark on the articulating bone in both the intraoperative and preoperative images; identifying the position of the initial implant in the intraoperative image, including the positions of the first and second centers of rotation; positioning the first center of rotation of the skeletal bone component in the preoperative image at an equivalent location relative to the first digital landmark; positioning the second center of rotation of the articulating bone component in the preoperative image at an equivalent location relative to the second digital landmark; determining a difference in the positions of the first and second centers of rotation relative to each other in the preoperative image; and analyzing at least one of offset and length differential of the articulating bone in the intraoperative image with respect to the articulating bone in the preoperative image.

In an embodiment the step of positioning the first center of rotation further includes the steps of aligning a first digital implant representation with the stationary bone component in the intraoperative image, wherein the first digital implant representation includes the first center of rotation; determining a location of the first digital implant representation in the intraoperative image with respect to the first digital landmark when the first digital implant representation is aligned with the stationary bone component; and positioning the first digital representation in the preoperative image at an equivalent location relative to the first digital landmark.

In an embodiment the step of positioning the second center of rotation further includes aligning a second digital implant representation with the articulating bone component in the intraoperative image, wherein the second digital implant representation includes the second center of rotation; determining a location of the second digital implant representation in the intraoperative image with respect to the second digital landmark when the second digital implant representation is aligned with the articulating bone component; and positioning the second digital representation in the preoperative image at an equivalent location relative to the second digital landmark.

An embodiment of the method also includes a step of generating at least one of length and offset differential data for an alternative articulating bone component based on known dimensions of the alternative articulating bone component. To do so, an embodiment performs the steps of selecting a fixed point on the second digital implant representation; selecting an alternative articulating bone component of the implant with known dimensions and selecting a fixed point on the alternative articulating bone component of the implant that corresponds with the fixed point on the second digital implant representation; comparing the relative location of the fixed point on the second digital implant representation with respect to the center of rotation of the second digital implant representation and comparing the relative location of the fixed point on the alternative articulating bone component with respect to a center of rotation of the alternative articulating bone component; and estimating changes in offset and length differential based on a comparison of the relative location of the fixed points with respect to the centers of rotation for each of the second digital implant representation and the alternative articulating bone component.

An embodiment further includes automatically providing an alternative articulating bone component based on known dimensions of the alternative articulating bone component to analyze at least one of offset and length differential.

An embodiment further includes the step of generating a digital line on the skeletal bone between at least two anatomically identifiable points on both the intraoperative image and the preoperative image. Responsive to a determination that the intraoperative and preoperative images are not orientationally aligned relative to each other, the system orients the intraoperative and preoperative images with respect to each other based on at least the digital line on the skeletal bone.

An embodiment also performs the step of scaling the intraoperative and preoperative images with respect to each other in responsive to a determination that the intraoperative and preoperative images are not scaled relative to each other.

In an embodiment, a pelvis of the patient is selected as the skeletal bone and a femur is selected as the articulating bone, and the skeletal component of the implant is an acetabular cup and the articulating bone component includes a femoral stem. Moreover, the first digital landmark may be a known location relative to an obturator foramen of the patient. The second digital landmark on the articulating bone may be a known location relative to the greater trochanter on a femur of the patient.

In an embodiment, the first center of rotation is measured relative to the first digital landmark in the preoperative image according a vector calculation to determine the location of the first center of rotation in the intraoperative image. In an embodiment a circle is generated around the skeletal bone component of the implant in the intraoperative image to calculate the first center of rotation.

An embodiment further includes generating a chart with a plurality of offset and length differentials for an assortment of alternative implant components.

In an embodiment, determining offset differential includes generating a first longitudinal axis line along a length of the articulating bone; generating a second longitudinal axis line along a length of the second digital implant representation; comparing the locations of the first and second longitudinal axis lines to calculate offset differential.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

In what follows, preferred embodiments of the invention are explained in more detail with reference to the drawings, in which:

FIG. 1 is a schematic image of a frontal, X-ray-type view of a pelvic girdle of a patient illustrating various anatomical features;

FIG. 1A is a schematic image viewable on a display screen by a user of an inventive system and method depicting a template image of a prosthesis superimposed over the upper portion of a femur in an X-ray image of the hip region of a patient;

FIG. 1B is an enlargement of the digital template image of FIG. 1A;

FIG. 2 is an image rendering similar to FIG. 1A after the digital template has been removed, illustrating measurement of a portion of the femoral head utilizing a reference line;

FIG. 3 is an image similar to FIG. 1A after the digital template has been re-scaled;

FIG. 4A is a schematic diagram of an inventive system that interfaces with a user;

FIG. 4B is a schematic diagram illustrating how multiple types of user interfaces can be networked via a cloud-based system with data and/or software located on a remote server;

FIG. 4C is a high-level schematic diagram of an inventive system;

FIG. 4D is a schematic diagram of the Intraoperative Analysis Module in FIG. 4C;

FIG. 4E is a schematic diagram of several variations of the Surgical Analysis Module in FIG. 4D;

FIG. 4F is a schematic diagram of the Intraoperative Rescaling Module in FIG. 4C;

FIG. 4G is a schematic diagram of an alternative Intraoperative Analysis System;

FIG. 4H is a schematic diagram of an AP (Anterior-Posterior) Pelvis Reconstruction System;

FIG. 5 is a Flowchart A for the operation of Intraoperative Rescaling in one construction of the inventive system and method;

FIG. 6 is a Flowchart B for an Anterior Approach for hip surgery utilizing Flowcharts G and J;

FIG. 7 is a Flowchart G showing technique flow for both contralateral and ipsilateral analysis;

FIG. 8 is a Flowchart W of several functions performed for hip analysis;

FIG. 9 is an image of the right side of a patient's hip prior to an operation and showing a marker placed on the greater trochanter as a landmark or reference point;

FIG. 10 is an image similar to FIG. 9 showing a reference line, drawn on (i) the pre-operative, ipsilateral femur or (ii) the contra-lateral femur, to represent the longitudinal axis of the femur;

FIG. 11 is an image similar to FIG. 10 with a line drawn across the pelvic bone intersecting selected anatomical features;

FIG. 12 is a schematic screen view of two images, the left-hand image representing a pre-operative view similar to FIG. 10 and the right-hand image representing an intra-operative view with a circle placed around the acetabular component of an implant to enable rescaling of that image;

FIG. 13 is a schematic screen view similar to FIG. 12 indicating marking of the greater trochanter of the right-hand, intra-operative image as a femoral landmark;

FIG. 14 is a schematic screen view similar to FIG. 13 with a reference line drawn on the intra-operative femur in the right-hand view;

FIG. 15 is an image similar to FIGS. 11 and 14 with a line drawn across the obturator foramen in both pre- and intra-operative views;

FIG. 16 is an overlay image showing the right-hand, intra-operative image of FIG. 15 superimposed and aligned with the left-hand, pre-operative image;

FIG. 17 represents a screen viewable by the user during a surgical procedure;

FIG. 18 is Flowchart J of AP Pelvis Stitching and Analysis;

FIG. 19 represents a screen view with a left-hand image of the contra-lateral, left side of a patient having a line drawn on the pubic symphysis;

FIG. 20 is a view similar to FIG. 19 plus a right-hand, intra-operative image of the right side of the patient, also having a line drawn on the pubic symphysis;

FIG. 21 shows the images of FIG. 20 overlaid and “stitched together” to reconstruct a view of the entire hip region of the patient;

FIG. 22 is view similar to FIG. 21 with one reference line drawn across the acetabular component of the image and another reference line touching the lower portions of the pelvis;

FIG. 23 is Flowchart L showing inventive Intraoperative Guidance for Intertrochanteric Reduction and Femoral Neck Fractures, referencing Flowcharts M and N;

FIG. 24 is Flowchart M for Intertrochanteric Reduction Guidance, referencing Flowchart P;

FIG. 25 is Flowchart P for processing a Contralateral or Ipsilateral Image;

FIG. 26 is a representation of a screen view with a left-hand image of the left, contralateral, “normal” side of a patient's hip region inverted to resemble the right, “fractured” side of the patient and showing marking of the lesser trochanter to serve as a femoral reference point;

FIG. 27 is a view similar to FIG. 26 showing drawing of a line across the obturator foramen for overlay reference;

FIG. 28 is a view similar to FIG. 27 showing measurement of neck shaft angle;

FIG. 29 is a screen view with the left-hand image similar to FIG. 28 and a right-hand image of the fractured side of the patient, showing marking of the lesser trochanter on the fractured side;

FIG. 30 is a view similar to FIG. 29 showing marking of the obturator foramen of the fractured side;

FIG. 31 is a view similar to FIG. 30 showing measurement of neck shaft angle on the fractured side;

FIG. 32 is a combined image showing the fractured side image overlaid on the normal, inverted side image;

FIG. 33 is Flowchart N showing scaling and measurement as referenced in Flowchart L;

FIG. 34 represents a screen view of an image of a screw implanted to treat an inter-trochanteric hip fracture, showing measurement of the screw;

FIG. 35 is a view similar to FIG. 34 showing measurement of Tip-Apex distance in an AP image;

FIG. 36 is a view similar to FIG. 35 plus a lateral view on the right-hand side of the screen, showing measurement of the screw;

FIG. 37 is a view similar to FIG. 36 showing measurement of Tip-Apex distance in the right-hand image;

FIG. 38 is a combined “Intertroch” view showing both Tip-Apex Analysis and Neck Shaft Analysis;

FIG. 39 is Flowchart Q of Intraoperative Guidance for Distal Radius Fracture Reduction, referencing Flowcharts R and S;

FIG. 40 is Flowchart R showing Radial Inclination and Length Reduction Guidance, and referencing Flowchart T;

FIG. 41 is Flowchart S showing Palmar Slope Reduction Guidance;

FIG. 42 is Flowchart T showing identification of various anatomical features in the wrist and image processing;

FIG. 43 represents a screen view of an image of a “normal” wrist of a patient with a line drawn on the radius to indicate its central axis;

FIG. 44 is a view similar to FIG. 43 with marking of selected anatomical points;

FIG. 45 is a view similar to FIG. 44 with a reference line drawn across the carpal bones to provide a stationary base reference;

FIG. 46 is a view of an image of the normal wrist rotated to draw Palmar Tilt;

FIG. 47 is a screen view with the left-hand image similar to FIG. 45 and a right-hand image of the fractured side of the patient, showing marking of the central axis of the radius on the fractured side;

FIG. 48 is a view similar to FIG. 47 showing marking of anatomical points on the fractured side;

FIG. 49 is a view similar to FIG. 48 with a reference line drawn across the carpal bones on the fractured side;

FIG. 50 is a screen view with the left-hand image similar to FIG. 46 and a right-hand image of the fractured wrist rotated to draw Palmar Tilt;

FIG. 51 is a combined view as an inventive Distal Radius Report;

FIG. 52 is an image similar to FIG. 15 with points marking the lowest point on the ischial tuberosity and points marking the obturator foramen and top of the pubic symphysis in both pre- and intra-operative views;

FIG. 53 is an overlay image showing the right-hand, intra-operative image of FIG. 52 superimposed and aligned with the left-hand, pre-operative image utilizing triangular stable bases;

FIG. 54 is a schematic combined block diagram and flow chart of an inventive identification guidance module;

FIG. 55 is a schematic block diagram of modules that analyze the orientation of a component such as an acetabular cup to generate abduction angle and anteversion information;

FIG. 56 is an image of an acetabular cup positioned in the left acetabulum of a patient with a circle drawn around its hemispherical surface to provide diameter information;

FIG. 57 is an image similar to that of FIG. 56 with a line segment drawn under the cup to calculate abduction angle relative to a neutral axis line;

FIG. 58 is an image similar to that of FIG. 57 with arcs drawn at the bottom of the acetabular cup to assist calculation of anteversion;

FIG. 59 is a Flowchart X of abduction angle and anteversion analysis by the modules of FIG. 55 relative to the images of FIGS. 56-58

FIG. 60 is a schematic screen view of an image of the right side of a patient's hip prior to an operation and showing a mark placed on the greater trochanter as a landmark or reference point;

FIG. 61 represents a screen viewable by the user during an inventive surgical procedure showing two images, the left-hand image representing a pre-operative view similar to FIG. 60 and the right-hand image representing an intra-operative view with a circle placed around the acetabular component of an implant to enable scaling or rescaling of that image based on an object of known size;

FIG. 62 is a schematic screen view similar to FIG. 61 indicating marking of the lateral shoulder of the prosthesis of the right-hand, intra-operative image, also with the greater trochanter marked in both images as a femoral landmark;

FIG. 63 is a schematic screen view similar to FIG. 62 with a reference box indicating an acetabular template generated on top of the acetabular component of the prosthesis on the intra-operative femur in the right-hand view;

FIG. 64 is a schematic screen view similar to FIG. 63 with the acetabular template now rendered in a precise location across the femoral head in the preoperative view, using intraoperative data gathered during the step represented by FIG. 63 ;

FIG. 65 is a schematic screen view similar to FIG. 64 showing the acetabular component outline overlaid on the femoral head on the left-hand, preoperative image with an overlay image of the prosthesis superimposed and aligned with the femoral stem of the prosthesis in the right-hand, intra-operative image;

FIG. 66 is a schematic screen view similar to FIG. 65 showing the femoral stem template placed on the pre-operative image, utilizing intraoperative data gathered in the step represented by FIG. 65 , with intraoperative Offset and Leg Length calculations;

FIG. 67 is a schematic diagram of an inventive Intra-operative Analysis Module implementing the Templating Technique generating images as shown above in FIGS. 60-66 ;

FIGS. 68A and 68B are a Flowchart U showing Intraoperative Templating Flow within the Module of FIG. 67 ;

FIG. 69 is a Flowchart Y showing functions applied to the pre-operative and intraoperative hip images for Intraoperative Templating of Flowchart U;

FIG. 70 is an image of a trial implant in a hip with the acetabular component transacted by a stationary base line and with two error analysis triangles.

FIGS. 71A and 71B depict a flowchart RT illustrating an alternative reverse templating technique according to the present invention;

FIG. 72 is a schematic block diagram illustrating components of a system according to the present invention that implements Flowchart RT of FIGS. 71A-B;

FIG. 73 is a schematic screen view of a preoperative image on the left and an intraoperative image on the right with a digital template superimposed on an actual “trial implant” prosthesis;

FIG. 74 is a screen view of the intraoperative actual trial implant and femur of FIG. 73 superimposed on the preoperative image of FIG. 73 ;

FIG. 75 is a screen view of the intraoperative digital template superimposed on the preoperative image on the left and the same digital template and actual trial implant on the right;

FIG. 76 is the screen view of FIG. 75 with both “Details” and “Compare Stems” windows expanded;

FIG. 77 is a Flowchart RTC for novel calculation of offset and leg length of alternative implants using known intraoperative data; and

FIG. 78 is a schematic block diagram illustrating components of a system according to the present invention that implements Flowchart RTC of FIG. 77 .

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

This invention may be accomplished by a system and method that acquire (i) at least one reference image including one of a preoperative image of a surgical site with skeletal and articulating bones and a contralateral image on an opposite side of the patient from the surgical site, and (ii) at least one intraoperative image of the site after an implant has been affixed to the articulating bone. In certain constructions, the system generates at least one reference stationary point on at least the skeletal bone in the reference image and at least one intraoperative stationary point on at least the skeletal bone in the intraoperative image. The location of the implant is identified in the intraoperative image, preferably including the position of first and second centers of rotation which are co-located in the intraoperative image. At least one of (i) a first digital implant representation is aligned with the skeletal component and with at least the intraoperative stationary point, and (ii) a second digital implant representation is aligned with the articulating bone component and at least one point on the articulating bone. One or more of the digital representations are copied and positioned in the reference image in an equivalent location relative to at least one of the reference stationary point and the articulating bone to directly or indirectly determine the position of the first and second centers of rotation relative to each other in the reference image. Any differences between the locations of at least one of the first and second centers of rotation in the reference image are utilized to analyze at least one of offset and length differential.

The term “digital representation” or “digital implant representation” as utilized herein includes a digital template or other digital annotation, such as a digital line having at least two points, e.g. a line representing a longitudinal axis or a diameter of an implant or a bone, or a digital circle or other geometric shape which can be aligned with an implant or a bone intraoperatively and then placed in a corresponding location in a preoperative image.

Broadly, some inventive techniques, referred to herein as “Image Overlay”, place one image over another image during analysis to generate a combined overlapped image, while certain other techniques according to the present invention, referred to by the present inventors as “Reverse Templating” or “Templating Technique”, obtain information from an intraoperative image and then work with a preoperative image. In some Reverse Templating constructions, the system places a digital template first on a properly-scaled intra-operative image and then on a scaled pre-operative image during analysis.

In other constructions according to the present invention, as described in more detail below in relation to FIGS. 71-78 below, alternative approaches for ‘Reverse Templating’ technique obviate the need for a pelvic reference line having two or more points. In some constructions, these alternatives instead rely upon certain image acquisition techniques, certain known imaging information, direct user manipulation, or the pelvic referencing line technique described in earlier constructions to create consistent scale and rotation between (i) a reference image including at least one of a preop image and an inverted contralateral image and (ii) an intraoperative image.

In general, accurate analysis of two images of a patient is directly related not only to how similar the two images are, but also how similarly the images are aligned with respect to scale, rotation, and translation. Using conventional techniques, a user would have to manually adjust the images and/or retake multiple images to achieve this goal, something that would be difficult to do reliably and accurately. As described in the parent application by the present inventors, utilizing two or more points as a stationary base in each image enables accurate analysis of the two images. Furthermore, the inventive Image Overlay technique can analyze how “similar” these images are to give the user feedback as to how accurate the results are, that is, to provide a confidence interval.

To obtain useful information, the images (the “intraop” intra-operative image and a “preop” pre-operative image, for example) must be scaled similarly and preferably rotated similarly. If the scale is off, this will lead to error unless re-scaled properly. If the rotation is off, the user is likely to spend significant time “eyeballing” to manually align the digital template on the preop image to match the intraop position during Reverse Templating according to the present invention. Use of one or more landmarks, such as the teardrop of the pelvis and/or the greater trochanter of the femur for hip-related surgery, according to the present invention aids in automated and accurate superimposing of a template onto the preop image to match the intraop position of an implant and superimposed digital template during Reverse Templating. For example, the teardrop helps accurately place the acetabular template and the greater trochanter helps place the femoral template at the right level on each image. As compared to the present Image Overlay technique, the present Reverse Templating technique is less sensitive to how similar the images are, and therefore has a wider breadth of use as images can be taken in different settings, such as comparing a preop image taken in a physician's office with an intraop image taken during hip surgery involving a posterior approach or other surgical procedure.

In some implementations, a system and method according to the parent application analyzes images to provide guidance to optimize the restoration of orthopaedic functionality at a surgical site within a patient, including capturing, selecting or receiving: (i) at least a first, reference image along at least a first viewing angle including one of a preoperative image of the surgical site and a contralateral image on an opposite side of the patient from the surgical site; and (ii) at least a second, results image of the site, preferably also along the first viewing angle, after a surgical procedure has been performed at the site. The system and method according to the parent application further include generating on each of the first and second images at least two points to establish a stationary base on a stable portion of the surgical site and identifying at least one landmark on another portion of the surgical site spaced from the stationary base, and providing at least one of (a) an overlay of the first and second images to enable comparison of at least one of bone and implant alignment within the images, (b) matching of at least one digital template to at least one feature in each of the first and second images, and (b) a numerical analysis of at least one difference between points of interest, such as an analysis of at least one of offset, length differential and orientation of at least one of a bone and an implant within the images.

Establishing at least three points for the stationary base, such as described below in relation to FIG. 70 , is especially useful for determining rotational differences between images. One or more points may be shared with points establishing a scaling line. Preferably, at least one landmark is selected that is spaced from the stationary base points to increase accuracy of overlaying and/or comparing images.

In some constructions, scaling, which includes rescaling in some implementations, of at least one of the images is accomplished by measuring an anatomical feature during surgery, and comparing the measured feature to an initial, preoperative image which includes that feature. In other constructions, scaling or rescaling is accomplished by comparing an intraoperative image with at least one known dimension of (i) an implant feature, such as the diameter of an acetabular cup or a screw, or (ii) a temporarily-positioned object such as a ball marker or a tool such as a reamer. Typically, scaling or rescaling is accomplished by establishing two points on a feature, generating a line between the two points, and determining the correct length for the line.

In certain constructions utilizing implants, especially prostheses, the combination of accurately scaled templating, together with an innovative approach of combining a software-driven system according to the present invention with intra-operative medical imaging such as digital X-ray images, dramatically improves the accuracy of various surgeries, especially difficult-to-see anterior approach surgery for total hip replacement. The present invention enables a surgeon to compensate for unintended variations such as how a reamer or other tool interacts with a bone during preparation of the surgical site before or during insertion of the implant. In some constructions, the surgeon or other user is able to compare a pre-operative or intra-operative X-ray-type image of a patient's anatomy with an initial intra-operative X-ray-type image of a trial prosthesis, and deduce changes of offset and/or leg length to help guide surgical decision making. This unique process will greatly improve patient satisfaction by increasing the accuracy of direct anterior surgery and other types of surgeries, and greatly increase surgeon comfort in performing these less-invasive procedures.

In some implementations, a system and method according to the present invention includes an inventive alternative “Reverse Templating” methodology for analyzing parameters such as abduction angle, intraoperative leg length and offset changes using a different application of the stationary base or at least one stationary point, intraoperative scaling and anatomical landmark identification techniques. For Reverse Templating implementations, the system and method combines the use of intraoperative data, gathered from intraoperative image analysis, with intraoperative templating on a preoperative ipsilateral image. The method can be applied in a wider range of hip arthroplasty surgeries because it is less sensitive to inconsistencies in preoperative and intraoperative image acquisition, allowing the user to apply this system and method during arthroplasty in the lateral position (i.e. posterior approach). This alternative system and method also enable a user to precisely analyze, intraoperatively, how a potential change in implant selection would affect parameters such as abduction angle, offset and/or leg length. In one novel approach, described below in relation to FIGS. 60-69 , the user will analyze the preoperative ipsilateral and intraoperative images ‘side by side’, without the need to overlap the images themselves. The system will scale and align these images relative to one another using at least intraoperative data, and then analyze offset and leg length changes by combining intraoperative data with a unique utilization of digital prosthetic templates.

For image analysis according to the parent application, preferably at least one stationary base and at least one anatomical landmark are selected. The term “stationary base”, also referred to herein as a “stable base”, means a collection of two or more points, which may be depicted as a line or other geometric shape, drawn on each of two or more images that includes at least one anatomical feature that is present in the two or more images of a region of a patient. For example, different images of a pelvic girdle PG of a patient, FIG. 1 , typically show one or both obturator foramen OF and a central pubic symphysis PS, which the present inventors have recognized as suitable reference points or features for use as part of a stationary base according to the present invention. Other useful anatomical features, especially to serve as landmarks utilized according to the present invention, include femoral neck FN and lesser trochanter LT, shown on right femur F_(R), and femoral head FH and greater trochanter GT shown on left femur F_(L), for example. Femoral head FH engages the left acetabulum of the pelvic girdle PG. Also shown in FIG. 1 are ischial tuberosities IT at the bottom of the ischium, a “tear drop” TD relating to a bony ridge along the floor of the acetabular fossa, and the anterior superior iliac spine ASIS and the anterior inferior iliac spine AIIS of the ileum. As described below, carpal bones serve as a stationary base in images for radial bone fixation and other wrist-related procedures. In general, having a “non-movable” anatomical feature associated with the trunk of a patient is preferred for a stationary base, rather than a jointed limb that can be positioned differently among two or more images.

In general, a longer stationary base is preferred over a shorter stationary base, because the longer base, especially if it is a line, will contain more pixels in images thereof and will increase accuracy of overlays and scaling according to the present invention. However, the further the stationary base is from the area of anatomical interest, the greater the risk of parallax-induced error. For example, if the area of interest is the hip joint, then the ideal stationary base will be near the hip. In some procedures involving hip surgery, for example, a stationary base line begins at the pubic symphysis PS, touches or intersects at least a portion of an obturator foramen OF, and extends to (i) the “tear drop” TD, or (ii) the anterior interior iliac spine AIIS. Of course, only two points are needed to define a line, so only two reliable anatomical features, or two locations on a single anatomical feature, are needed to establish a stationary base utilized according to the present invention. More complex, non-linear stationary bases may utilize additional identifiable points to establish such non-linear bases.

Additionally, at least one identifiable anatomic “landmark”, or a set of landmarks, is selected to be separate from the stationary base; the one or more landmarks are utilized in certain constructions to analyze the accuracy of the overlay process. This additional “landmark” preferably is part of the stationary anatomy being anatomically compared. For example, the inferior portion of the ischial tuberosity IT can be identified as an additional landmark. This landmark, in conjunction with the stationary base, will depict any differences or errors in pelvic anatomy or the overlay which will enable the physician to validate, or to have more confidence in, the output of the present system.

The term “trial hip prosthetic” is utilized herein to designate an initial implant selected by a surgeon as a first medical device to insert at the surgical site, which is either the right side or the left side of a patient's hip in this construction. In some techniques, the trial prosthetic is selected based on initial digital templating similar to the procedure described below for FIGS. 1A-3 , for example.

One novel technique according to the parent application is described in relation to FIGS. 1A-3 , which illustrate successive views or “screenshots” visible to a user of a system and method according to the novel invention utilized for hip surgery. FIG. 1A is a schematic representation of a screen view 10 depicting a digital template image 20 of a prosthesis superimposed over the upper portion of a right femur F_(R). In some techniques a digitized X-ray image of the hip region of a patient along a frontal or anterior-to-posterior viewing angle is utilized for screen view 10 and, in other techniques, a digital photograph “secondary” image of a “primary” X-ray image of the hip region of a patient along a frontal or anterior-to-posterior viewing angle is utilized for screen view 10. In one construction, screen view 10 is shown on a computer monitor and, in another construction, is shown on the screen or viewing region of a tablet or other mobile computing device, as described in more detail below. Dashed line SK represents skin of the patient and provides an outline of soft tissues for this viewing angle. Pelvic Girdle PG may also be referred to as a pelvis or hip.

Ball marker BM represents a spherical metal reference object of known dimension placed between right leg RL and left leg LL, as traditionally utilized to scale many types of medical images including X-ray images. Use of a ball marker or other non-anatomical feature is optional in techniques according to the present invention, as described in more detail below. In particular, the inventive techniques useful for unplanned trauma surgery, where direct measurement of an anatomical feature, such as caliper measurements of an extracted femoral head during emergency hip surgery, can be utilized as described in the parent application to intraoperatively guide such surgery.

Template image 20 is shown in greater detail in FIG. 1B with a body component 22 including a stem 24, a fastener recess 26, and a support 28 with a trunion 29, and an acetabular component 30 carried by support 28. Dashed line 32 indicates the longitudinal axis of support 28 and dashed line 34 indicates a longitudinal body axis for template image 20 to be aligned relative to a longitudinal axis of the femur F, as described in more detail below. Also shown are a center of rotation 33 for support 28 of femoral body component 22 and a center of rotation 35 for acetabular component 30. Offset and leg length differential calculations based on the centers of rotation 33 and 35 are discussed in more detail below in relation to FIGS. 71A-78 .

Additional icons and reference elements are provided in this construction, such as a reference line delete icon 40 for line 41, FIG. 1A, a template body delete icon 42 and an acetabular component delete icon 44 for body component 22 and acetabular component 30, FIG. 1B, respectively. One or more of these “virtual” items can be removed or added to view 10 by a user as desired by highlighting, touching or clicking the “soft keys” or “soft buttons” represented by the icons. In certain embodiments, one or more of the icons 40, 42 and/or 44 serves as a toggle to provide “on-off” activation or de-activation of that feature. Characters or other indicia 46, FIG. 1A, can be utilized to designate image number and other identifying information. Other useful information 48 can be shown such as Abduction Angle, Offset Changes and Leg Length Changes, as discussed in more detail below.

Screen view 51, FIG. 2 , is similar to view 10 of FIG. 1A after the digital template 20 has been removed, illustrating measurement of a portion of the femoral head FH of femur F_(R) utilizing a reference line 60. Four indicator squares 52, 54, 56 and 58, also referred to as reference squares, navigation handles, or navigation points, are provided in this construction to guide a user to draw the reference line 60 in the viewing plane of screen view 51. In some constructions, a user touches one of the squares 52-58 with a finger or a mouse cursor, and utilizes the square, such as by ‘dragging’ it, to move a marker to a desired location. This enables manipulation without blocking the location of interest.

Characters 70 such as “New Femoral Head Width” invite a user to enter a direct measurement into field 72, such as “50” to represent an actual 50 mm caliper measurement for the dimension represented by line 60, as described in more detail below. In this example, an initial scaling of image 51 had generated an estimated measurement of “45.6 mm” for line 60. Other functional “soft buttons” are “Rescale” 74, “Retemplate” 76, “Cancel” 78 and “Done” 80. In other constructions, as described in more detail below, intraoperative rescaling is conducted separately from a hip replacement process, and the direct measurement value, if needed, is utilized for intraoperative rescaling, for adjusting the template size, for comparing drawn lines, and other uses.

Direct measurement of the femoral head, such as with calipers, typically is conducted before a trial implant is inserted. The femoral head measurement enables (i) re-scaling of the preoperative template or (ii) accurate scaling for the first time, especially where a preoperative template has not been utilized. During overlay analysis, however, scaling is accomplished in some constructions by measuring or looking up a dimension of an implant, such as the radius or width of the acetabular component of a hip prosthesis, for example.

FIG. 3 is an image of a view 90 similar to view 10 of FIG. 1A, along the same viewing angle, after the digital template 20 has been re-scaled according to the parent application to a revised template 20′. In this example, reference line 41 was 13.1 mm in FIG. 1A, and reference line 41′, FIG. 3 , is now 14.3 mm as calculated by the system after re-scaling based on the direct measurement. Also, for revised information 48′, the Offset Changes are re-calculated to be “0.9 mm” and the Leg Length Changes are recalculated to be “4.1 mm”.

In one construction, the JointPoint Intraop™ system utilizes an interpolation mapping approach with one or more reference points or “landmarks” to achieve template auto-rescaling. Certain important landmarks on an X-ray image, or on a photograph of an X-ray image, are used to anchor each fragment of a template. This is the basic model:

$\begin{matrix} {{\sum\limits_{0}^{m}P_{i}} = {\sum\limits_{0}^{m}{f\left( p_{i} \right)}}} & {{EQ}.1} \end{matrix}$ In this model, m is the number of landmarks, P_(i) is landmark after interpolation mapping, and p_(i) is the original landmark. f(p_(i)) is the mapping function for rescaling.

$\begin{matrix} {{f\left( p_{i} \right)} = \frac{p_{i} - p_{2i}}{p_{zi} - p_{2i}}} & {{EQ}.2} \end{matrix}$ where P_(i1) and P_(i2) are two reference landmarks automatically provided by program based on the size of x-ray image. p _(1i) =└p _(i)×ratio┘  EQ.3: p _(2i) =┌p _(i)×ratio┐  EQ.4: Where “ratio” is the comparison of size of a regulator in a target x-ray image and a compared x-ray image. The regulator can be a ball marker, or a user-defined line or circle such as a circle drawn around an acetabular component.

$\begin{matrix} {{ratio} = \frac{{size}{of}{target}{regulator}}{{size}{of}{}{compared}{regulator}}} & {{EQ}.5} \end{matrix}$

By following the model indicated above, each of the template fragments lands in the same position when the size of a template is changed and, therefore, users avoid the need to replace templates every time a rescaling happens. Correct template placement can also be facilitated by storing coordinates of a particular location on the femoral component of a template, such as the midpoint of the top of the trunion 29 shown in FIG. 1B, for example.

In one implementation, a novel system 101, FIG. 4A, has a user interface 103, a processor 105, and a communications module 107 that communicates with a remote server and/or other devices via a cloud 109, which represents a cloud-based computing system. User interface 103 includes a display 111, a user input module 113 and device input 115 such as (i) a camera, to take a digital photo of a fluoroscopic imaging screen, also referred to as a “fluoro” image, or of a printed or otherwise fixed (i.e., not-alterable and/or non-downloadable) X-ray-type image, or (ii) a connection to a conventional medical imaging system (not shown). Display 111 is a separate computer monitor or screen in some constructions and, in other constructions, is an integrated touch-screen device which facilitates input of data or commands of a user to processor 105. In some constructions, user input 113 includes a keyboard and a mouse.

Processor 105 includes capability to handle input, module 119, to send and receive data, module 121, and to render analysis and generate results, module 123. Two-way arrows 117 and 125 represent wired or integrated communications in some constructions and, in other constructions, are wireless connections. Communications module 107 has a send/upload module 127 and a receive/download module 129 to facilitate communications between processor 105 and cloud 109 via wired or wireless connections 125 and 131, respectively.

In some constructions, the present invention provides the ability to accurately adjust implants and corresponding templates intra-operatively by combining mobile-based templating functionality, utilizing a mobile computing device such as a tablet, a Google Glass™ device, a laptop or a smart phone wirelessly interconnected with a main computing device, and a unique scaling technique translating real life intra-operative findings into selection of an optimally-configured implant for a patient. Preferably, the system includes a mode that does not require connection with a remote server, in the event of loss of internet connectivity or other extended system failure.

FIG. 4B is a schematic diagram of a novel system 141 illustrating how multiple types of user interfaces in mobile computing devices 143, 145, 147 and 149, as well as laptop 151 and personal computer 153, can be networked via a cloud 109 with a remote server 155 connected through web services. Another useful mobile imaging and computing device is the Google Glass wearable device. Data and/or software typically are located on the server 155 and/or storage media 157.

Software to accomplish the techniques described herein is located on a single computing device in some constructions and, in other constructions such as system 141, FIG. 4B, is distributed among a server 155 and one or more user interface devices which are preferably portable or mobile.

A novel system 200, FIG. 4C, includes a User Input Module 202 with one or more data items that are provided to a Scaling Module 204, a Templating Module 206, an Intraoperative Analysis Module 208, and a Display 210. Although Scaling Module 204 is illustrated and described as separate from Intraoperative Module 208 in some constructions, both Modules 204 and 208 can be considered as forms of analysis conducted according to the parent application utilizing a stationary base generated on at least two images. Further, User Input can be considered as a data input module that generates at least two points to establish a stationary base on at least one anatomical feature that is present in the images. In this construction, system 200 also includes a storage media 212 which receives and/or provides data to Modules 204, 206, 208 and Display 210. Scaling Module 204 includes Standard Preoperative Scaling unit 214, Intraoperative Scaling unit 216 and Intraoperative Rescaling unit 218 in this construction and provides data to Templating Module 206 and/or Display 210.

The Intraoperative Analysis Module 208 is illustrated in more detail in FIG. 4D with an Image Selection Module 220, a Stable Base Identification Module 222 which guides the selection of at least one stationary base, and a Landmark Identification Module 224. Module 222 provides instructions to Overlay Module 226; Module 224 provides instructions to the Overlay Module 226 and/or to an optional Longitudinal Axis Identification Module 228, shown in phantom. When utilized, module 228 communicates with Differential Analysis Module 230 which in turn communicates with Surgical Analysis Module 232, shown in more detail in FIG. 4E. Overlay Module 226 communicates with Surgical Analysis Module 232 either directly or via Differential Analysis Module 230.

Also optional and present in some constructions in the Intraoperative Analysis Module 208 is a Stable Base Error Analysis Module 2100 that can provide outputs to Overlay Module 226 and/or Differential Analysis Module 230. When utilized, the Stable Base Error Analysis Module 2100 compares at least two images selected in Image Selection Module 220, and analyzes error or differences between the anatomic structures that contain the stationary base points. The module 2100 provides visual and/or quantitative data of image inconsistencies, such as shown in FIG. 70 below, providing guidance of how much value to place in the output of Intraoperative Analysis Module 208, FIGS. 4C and 4D. Within the module 2100, the system automatically, or the user manually, identifies one or more anatomic error reference points located within the anatomic structure selected to contain the stationary base. At least one of the error reference points, but preferably all of them, must be separate from the points utilized to establish the stationary base. The two images are scaled, rotated and transformed utilizing the stationary base according to the parent application. Because the error reference points identified in this module 2100 are separate from the stationary base points used to align the images, but are on the same non-movable anatomic structure, differences in error reference point location between the two images allow for the analysis within this module 2100. If the points seem extremely close, the anatomic structures are likely to be positioned very consistently between the two images being analyzed. If points are further apart, such as shown and described in relation to FIG. 70 below, then there are likely to be imaging and/or anatomic inconsistencies that may impact the data provided by the Analysis Module 208.

FIG. 4E is a schematic diagram of several variations of the Surgical Analysis Module 232, FIG. 4D, depending on the surgical procedures to be guided according to the parent application. One or more of the following modules are present in different constructions according to the parent application: Hip Arthroplasty Module 240, Intertrochanteric Reduction Analysis Module 242, Femoral Neck Reduction Analysis Module 244 and/or Distal Radius Fracture Reduction Analysis Module 246. In the illustrated construction, the Hip Arthroplasty Module 240 includes at least one of an Ipsilateral Analysis unit 250 a, a Contralateral Analysis unit 252, an AP Pelvis Stitching and Analysis unit 254 and an alternative Contralateral Analysis unit 256 which communicates with an Image Flip unit 258 and an AP Pelvis Stitching and Analysis unit 260. In some constructions, Ipsilateral Analysis module 250 a optionally provides inputs to a Reverse Templating Module 250 b, shown in phantom. Hip Arthroplasty is described in more detail below in relation to FIGS. 6-17 , with AP Pelvis Stitching and Analysis described in relation to FIGS. 18-22 below.

Intertrochanteric Reduction Analysis Module 242 includes a Contralateral Analysis Module 270, a Neck Shaft Analysis unit 272 and a Tip Apex Analysis unit 274 in this construction. Femoral Neck Reduction Analysis Module 244 includes a Contralateral Analysis Module 276 in this construction. Intertrochanteric Reduction Analysis and Femoral Neck Reduction Analysis are described in combination with FIGS. 23-38 below.

Distal Radius Fracture Reduction Analysis Module 246 includes Contralateral Analysis Module 278 in this construction. Distal Radius Fracture Reduction is described in relation to FIGS. 39-51 below.

Three aspects of the parent application are represented by FIGS. 4F-4H for intraoperative rescaling, intraoperative analysis, and AP Pelvis reconstruction, respectively. FIG. 4F is a schematic diagram of the Intraoperative Rescaling Module 218, FIG. 4C, with Image Input Module 210 which contains Templated Input Module 201 a, Direct Measurement Recording Module 203, Image Rescaling Module 205, and Template Object Re-rendering Module 207. A digital representation of a prosthesis, such as a “template”, is provided to Template Input Module 201 in one construction and, in another construction, is generated by that Module 201. The digital template is provided to Direct Measurement Recording Module 203, which also records a direct measurement such as the width of the femoral head in one construction and, in another construction, utilizes a known implant dimension such as the width of a screw or the radius of the acetabular component of a hip prosthesis. The Image Rescaling Module 205 calculates possible adjustments in sizing that may be required. For example, if a first image of a hip depicted a femoral head as having a width of 48 mm, but direct measurement by calipers reveals that the true dimension is 50 mm, then the 2 mm discrepancy represents a four percent difference or deviation, and the first image is rescaled by four percent accordingly.

In some constructions, Re-rendering Module 207 includes a Prosthetic Placement Update Module 280 and/or, in certain constructions, an Other Object Placement Update Module 282 to re-render objects other than prostheses. Prosthetic Placement Update Module typically utilizes coordinate information, referred to herein as ‘centroid’ information, that is stored in a database and tells the system what reference point should remain stationary, relative to the image, during the rescaling process. Optionally, Intraoperative Rescaling Module 218 further includes a Stationary Base Identification Module 2110 and a Secondary Image Rescaling Module 2112, both shown in phantom, which can provide rescaling of the secondary image to Templated Object Re-rendering Module 207. These phantom modules facilitate the scaling of a second image based on directly observable measurements in the first image, if both images include a stationary base that identify the same anatomic points. More specifically, the first image is scaled directly via the Direct Measurement Recording Module 203, but this scaling is then applied to the second image by using the length ratios between the stable bases identified in Stationary Base Identification Module 2110.

An alternative Intraoperative Analysis System 208′, FIG. 4G, includes an Image Capture Module 209, a User Data Input Module 211, and an Analysis Module 213. Optional additional capabilities include a Mathematical Correction Input Module 215 and an Error Analysis Module 217 as described in more detail below. Image Capture Module 209 preferably includes at least one of a Camera Picture input 219 for receiving or otherwise acquiring at least one photograph, a Radiographic Image input 221 for accessing a radiographic image from storage media or other location, and an Interface 223 which communicates with a fluoroscope or other medical imaging device to capture, receive or otherwise acquire an image in real time. At least one of inputs 219, 221 and/or 223 captures or otherwise acquires (i) at least one preoperative or contralateral reference image and (ii) at least one intraoperative or postoperative results image. The at least two images are provided to User Input Data Module 211 which utilizes a Stable Base Identification Module 225 to guide a user to select at least two stable base points, such as points on a pelvis, to generate a stable base on each image, and a Landmark Identification Module 227 to prompt the user to select a location spaced from and separate from the stable base, such as a location on the greater trochanter, on each image. Optionally, in certain constructions the Image Capture Module 209 also provides the images to the Error Analysis Module 217, which guides a user to select at least one point on the bony anatomy which contains the stable base points, to be analyzed for anatomical or imaging inconsistencies that could create error in the Analysis Module 213. An example of the operation of Error Analysis Module 217 is illustrated in FIG. 70 below, where the difference between two overlaid triangles, representing sets of three points in each image along the bony pelvis, is analyzed for pelvic alignment inconsistencies. These images with selected identifications are provided to the Analysis Module 213 which utilizes at least one of the following modules in this construction: Overlay Module 229 which utilizes visual analysis by the user and/or an image recognition program; Mathematical Analysis Module 231 which performs math calculations; or Other Analysis Module 233 which utilizes different visual change criteria or quantification analysis.

If anatomy of the patient being analyzed shifts or otherwise moves between capture of the at least two images, then optional Mathematical Correction Input Module 215 is beneficial to compensate for such movement. Hip Analysis Correction Module 235 is useful for hip surgery, such as by utilizing user identification of the femoral longitudinal axis in each image, while Other Mathematical Correction Modules 237 are utilized as appropriate for other anatomical regions of a patient undergoing surgery or other corrective treatment.

An alternative AP Pelvis Reconstruction System 260′, FIG. 4H, utilizes Image Capture 239 to obtain an image of each side of a patient, such as both sides of a hip, both shoulders, or two images of other anatomy for which two locations are substantially symmetrical or otherwise comparable. The at least two images are provided to Image Scaling Module 241 and Image Stitching Location Capture Module 243, which identifies corresponding locations such as the tip of the pubic symphysis in each image. After scaling and location identification by Modules 241 and 243, the images updated with that information are provided to Image Stitching Module 245 which generates an overlay as described in more detail below.

Optional modules include Contralateral Image Flipping Module 247 which reverses one of the images before it is provided directly to Image Stitching Module 245, or is provided indirectly via one or both of Image Scaling Module 241 and/or Image Stitching Location Capture Module 243. The output of a larger, stitched, overlay-type image from Image Stitching Module 245 can be provided directly to an AP Pelvis Analysis Module 251 or via an Image Cropping Module 249 to adjust the viewing area of the stitched image. In this construction, Analysis Module 251 includes one or more of Leg Length Analysis Module 253, Acetabular Cup Angle Analysis Module 255, and Other AP Pelvis Analysis Modules.

Flowchart A, FIG. 5 , depicts the operation of Intraoperative Rescaling in one construction of the novel system and method related to hip surgery. The operation is initiated, as represented by “Start” in step 300, and the femoral head is extracted and measured using calipers, step 302. The technique proceeds to step 304, and a line is drawn in software corresponding to femoral head measurement such as illustrated in FIG. 2 above. The calliper measurement is recorded, step 306, FIG. 5 , and the system calculates intraoperative rescaling from directly measured information, step 308. The system applies rescaling to the selected image, step 310, and, in one construction, uses prosthetic centroid information and rescaling data to update location of the prosthesis on the image. More generally, the system utilizes at least one selected point, such as the mid-point of the trunion, that is associated with the prosthetic template to identify where the prosthesis should remain stationary on the rescaled image. The system rescales and redraws all other objects on the image, step 314, and rescaling is concluded, step 316.

Flowchart B, FIG. 6 , illustrates an Anterior Approach for hip surgery utilizing Flowcharts G and J. This technique is commenced, step 320, and the decision whether to conduct ipsilateral analysis is made, step 322. If yes, Flowchart G is initiated, step 324; if no, then a decision is made whether to conduct Contralateral analysis, step 326. If yes, then Flowchart G is utilized, step 328, after which it is decided whether to create and analyze stitched AP Pelvis, step 330. If yes, then Flowchart J is activated. The Anterior Approach is concluded, step 334.

Flowchart G, FIG. 7 , shows technique flow for both contralateral and ipsilateral analysis. This technique is commenced, step 340, and either contralateral or ipsilateral analysis is selected, step 342. For contralateral analysis, the contralateral hip image is captured, step 344, and the image is flipped, step 346. For ipsilateral analysis, the preoperative ipsilateral hip image is opened, step 348. For both types of analysis, Flowchart W is applied, step 350.

Flowchart W, FIG. 8 , after being activated by step 350, FIG. 7 , guides a user to identify a femoral landmark such as the greater trochanter in step 370, FIG. 8 , and then the femoral axis is identified, step 372. These steps are illustrated in FIGS. 9 and 10 , below. A line is then drawn across the bony pelvis, step 374, as shown in FIG. 11 .

The technique proceeds to capturing an operative hip image, step 352, FIG. 7 , and identifying an acetabular component, step 354, such as shown in FIG. 12 below. Acetabular components are also shown in and discussed relative to FIGS. 52-53 and FIGS. 55-59 below. The image is scaled by entering the size of the acetabular component, step 356, and Flowchart W is then applied to the operative hip, step 358. The operative and comparative hip images are scaled by a stationary base generated by selecting at least two reference points on the bony pelvis, step 360, such as shown in FIG. 15 . The scaled images are then overlaid in step 362 using the bony pelvis points, such as the overlaid lines 386 and 412 shown in FIG. 16 . Differences in offset and leg length are calculated, step 364, and the technique is terminated, step 366, returning to step 326, FIG. 6 , for ipsilateral comparison or to step 330 for contralateral comparison.

Leg displacement is calculated in the pre-operation and post-operation (intra-operation) to give users a visualization of the operation process. The following steps 1-6 with Equations 6-10 are utilized in one construction:

1. Draw a landmark, such as a single point or dot to represent a feature such as the greater trochanter, and a “stationary base” generated by selecting at least two points on the bony pelvis in each of the pre-op image and post-op x-ray image.

2. One procedure for aligning two images utilizing corresponding stationary bases, each base comprised of precisely two points that define a line, is accomplished by the following approach. Based on the positions of zero coordinate in each x-ray image, translate the line segment position into screen coordinate system. P_(original) is the point's coordinate on each image's coordinate plane. Z_(screen) is the coordinate of zero in each image on the screen coordinate plane. P _(screen) =P _(original) +Z _(screen)  EQ. 6 3. Find the rotation angle θ between the two line segments line_(postop) and line_(preop) are the line vector of each line segment.

$\begin{matrix} {\theta = {\cos^{- 1}\frac{❘\left( {{line}_{postop},{line}_{preop}} \right)❘}{{{line}_{preop}}{{line}_{preop}}}}} & {{EQ}.7} \end{matrix}$ 4. Calculate the rotation matrix and apply it to the landmark in pre-op image. lm_(preop) is the center point position of landmark, lm′_(preop) is the center point position of landmark after rotation.

$\begin{matrix} {{R = \begin{pmatrix} {\cos\theta} & {\sin\theta} \\ {\sin\theta} & {{- \cos}\theta} \end{pmatrix}}{{Im}_{preop}^{\prime} = {R*{Im}_{preop}}}} & {{EQ}.8} \end{matrix}$ 5. Calculate the length ratio between the two line segments and scale the pre-op image based on it to get the landmark position after scaling. Use of more than two points for a stationary base benefits from a ‘best fit model’ approach, such as an algorithm that minimizes the distance between respective points in each of the images. S=length_(postop)/length_(preop) lm″ _(preop) =S*lm′ _(preop)  EQ. 9 6. Finally, calculate the distance of the two landmarks in both horizontal and vertical direction, visualize the results along with the two overlaid x-ray images. {offset,leg length}=lm _(postop) −lm″ _(preop)  EQ. 10

A currently preferred implementation of the JointPoint IntraOp™ Anterior system, which provides the basis for intraoperative analysis of the anterior approach to hip surgery, is illustrated in relation to FIGS. 9-22 . FIG. 9 is an image 376 of the right side of a patient's hip prior to an operation and showing a marker 378, bracketed by reference squares 377 and 379, placed by a user as guided by the system, or placed automatically via image recognition, on the greater trochanter as a landmark or reference point, such as indicated in box 224, FIG. 4D and in box 227, FIG. 4G, for the Landmark Identification Module of systems 208 and 208′, respectively. FIG. 10 is an image 376′ similar to FIG. 9 showing a reference line 380, bracketed by reference squares 381, 382, 383 and 384, drawn on (i) the pre-operative, ipsilateral femur or (ii) the contra-lateral femur, to represent the longitudinal axis of the femur. FIG. 11 is an image 376″ similar to FIG. 10 with a line 386, defined by two end-points, which is drawn across the pelvic bone intersecting selected anatomical features.

FIG. 12 is a schematic screen view of two images, the left-hand image 376′ representing a pre-operative view similar to FIG. 10 and the right-hand image 390 representing an intra-operative view with a circle 392 placed around the acetabular component 394 of an implant 398 to enable rescaling of that image. In some constructions, circle 392 is placed by an image recognition program and then manually adjusted by a user as desired. Reference square 398 designates implant 398 to the user. FIG. 13 is a schematic screen view similar to FIG. 12 indicating marking of the greater trochanter of the right-hand, intra-operative image 390′ as a femoral landmark 400, guided by reference squares 402 and 404. FIG. 14 is a schematic screen view similar to FIG. 13 with a reference line 406 drawn on the intra-operative femur in the right-hand view 390″, guided by reference squares 407, 408, 409 and 410.

FIG. 15 is an image similar to FIGS. 11 and 14 with a line 386, 412 drawn across the obturator foremen in both pre- and intra-operative views 376″ and 390′″, respectively. Reference squares 413, 414, 415 and 416 guide the user while drawing reference line 412.

FIG. 16 is an overlay image showing the right-hand, intra-operative, PostOp image 390′″ of FIG. 15 superimposed and aligned with the left-hand, pre-operative PreOp image 376″. In this construction, soft button icons for selectively changing PreOp image 376″ and/or PostOp image 390′″ are provided at the lower left-hand portion of the screen.

In another construction, more than two points are generated for the stationary base for each image, such as illustrated in FIG. 52 for a preoperative image 1200 and a postoperative image 1201, and in FIG. 53 for a combined overlay image 1298 of the preoperative image 1200 and the postoperative image 1201 of FIG. 52 . Similar locations on the pelvis in each image are selected to generate the points utilized to establish a stationary base for each image. In image 1200, for example, a first point 1202 is generated on an upper corner of the obturator foramen or at the pelvic tear drop, a second point 1204 is generated at the top or superior portion of the pubic symphysis, and a third point 1206 is generated at the lowest or inferior point on the ischial tuberosity. Lines 1208, 1210 and 1212 are drawn connecting those points to generate a visible stationary base triangle 1216 on image 1200. Also shown is a point 1214 on the greater trochanter. In postoperative image 1201, first and second points 1203 and 1205 correspond with first and second points 1202 and 1204 in image 1200. A third point 1207 is shown in image 1201 between reference squares 1209 and 1211 in the process of a user selecting the lowest point on the ischial tuberosity to correspond with third point 1206 in image 1200. The user is prompted by “Mark lowest point on Ischial Tuberosity” in the upper portion of image 1201. Also shown is a circle 1213 around the acetabular component and a point 1215 on the greater trochanter.

Establishing at least three points is especially useful for determining rotational differences between images. Overlay image 1298, FIG. 53 , shows the three points 1202, 1204 and 1206 of preop image 1200, forming the visible preop stationary base triangle 1216, which is positioned relative to the corresponding three points 1203, 1205 and 1207 of postop image 1201, forming a visible postop stationary base triangle 1311 overlaid relative to triangle 1216 in FIG. 53 . A ‘best fit overlay’ can be created using these points by identifying the centroid of the polygon created by these point, and rotating the set of point relative to one another to minimize the summation of distance between each of the related points. In this construction, scaling of the two images may be performed by these same set of points or, alternatively, a separate set of two or more points may be utilized to scale the two images relative to each other. Clicking on a PreOp soft-button icon 1300 and a PostOp icon 1301 enable a user to alter positioning of images 1200 and 1201, respectively, within image 1298 in a toggle-switch-type manner to selectively activate or de-activate manipulation of the selected feature. One or more points of a stationary base may be shared with points establishing a scaling line. Preferably, at least one landmark is selected that is spaced from the stationary base points to increase accuracy of overlaying and/or comparing images.

Also illustrated in FIG. 53 are “Offset and Leg Length Changes” with “Leg Length: −0.2 mm”, “Offset: 21.8 mm” and “Confidence Score: 8.1”. A confidence ratio that describes the quality of fit can be created by comparing the overlay area of the two triangles relative to the size of the overall polygon formed by the two triangles, including the non-overlapping areas of each triangle. Abduction angle and anteversion calculations are described below in relation to FIGS. 55-59 .

A screen 420 viewable by a user during a surgical procedure guided by a JointPoint™ IntraOp Anterior™ system according to the parent application is represented by FIG. 17 . The user selects OVERLAY-IPSILATERAL HIP 422 or OVERLAY-CONTRALATERAL HIP 424 with the option to use an existing overlay. The operative hip side to be “replaced” is selected, via window 426, to confirm which will be the operative side and the comparative side; the comparative side is the same side as the operative side when a prior ipsilateral image is chosen. Another option for the user is to select AP (Anterior-Posterior) Pelvis simulation, step 425; in another construction, AP Pelvis is presented to a user at a later stage within Contralateral Hip overlay creation.

Flowchart J, FIG. 18 , presents one novel technique for AP Pelvis Stitching and Analysis. The technique is commenced, step 500, and a contralateral image is flipped to its original orientation, step 502. A stitching line is drawn in the operative image, step 504, such as a line 516 on the pubic symphysis shown in FIG. 19 for image 515, guided by reference squares 517, 518, 519 and 520. A similar line is drawn on the contralateral image, step 506, such as shown by line 522 in FIG. 20 for image 521, guided by reference squares 523, 524, 525 and 526. The images are stitched, step 508, to simulate an AP Pelvis image as shown in FIG. 21 with overlapped stitching lines 516 and 522, with optional user adjustment by touching movement control icon 527, also referred to as a “rotation handle”. The images are cropped, step 510, and the simulated AP Pelvis is utilized for intraoperative analysis, step 512, such as leg length analysis or acetabular cobb angle. The technique terminates, step 514, and returns to step 334, FIG. 6 , in one construction.

FIG. 22 is view similar to FIG. 21 with one reference line 530 drawn across the acetabular component of the image 521′, as guided by reference squares 531, 532, 533 and 534, and another reference line 536, as guided by reference squares 537, 538, 539 and 540, touching the lower portions of the pelvis to enable accurate stitching for intraoperative analysis, including acetabular component cobb angle determination, according to the parent application. Additional analysis of the acetabular component, such as anteversion or other alterations of position, orientation or size, can be utilized as well.

Flowchart L, FIG. 23 , illustrates Intraoperative Guidance for Intertrochanteric Reduction and Femoral Neck Fractures according to another aspect of the parent application, referencing Flowcharts M and N. The technique begins, step 600, and reduction guidance is considered, step 602. If selected, then the procedure outlined in Flowchart M is initiated, step 604. Otherwise, or after the Flowchart M procedure has been completed, the technique proceeds to step 606 where the type of surgical procedure is selected. In this construction, for Femoral Neck Fracture Reduction, the technique proceeds to step 612 to generate a report and store data for future reference. If Intertrochanteric Reduction is selected, then guidance for Apex-Tip calculation is considered. If selected, then the procedure described by Flowchart N is followed, step 610. Otherwise, or after the Flowchart N procedure has been completed, the technique proceeds to step 612 where a report is generated and data stored as mentioned above. Guidance for those procedures then ends, step 614.

Flowchart M, FIG. 24 , for Intertrochanteric Reduction Guidance, commences at step 620 when selected and the technique proceeds to step 622 where a contralateral hip image is taken and then flipped, step 624, to achieve a screen view such as illustrated in FIG. 26 . The inverted contralateral image is then processed as outlined in Flowchart P as described below. The surgeon then reduces the hip fracture, step 628, and the user of this Guidance takes an X-ray-type image of the operative hip, indicated in step 630 as “User takes ipsilateral hip fluoro”. That image is then processed by the procedure of Flowchart P, step 632, and the contralateral and ipsilateral images are overlaid, step 634, such as shown in FIG. 32 .

The overlay and neck shaft angles are analyzed in step 636, FIG. 24 and, if not acceptable, the procedure returns to step 628 for another round of fracture reduction and analysis. Once acceptable, the procedure of Flowchart M is ended, step 638, and the technique returns to step 606, FIG. 23 as discussed above.

Flowchart P, FIG. 25 , for processing a Contralateral or Ipsilateral Image, begins at step 640 and then at least one femoral landmark is identified, step 642, such as marking the lesser trochanter with mark 660 as shown in FIG. 26 for an inverted image 661 of the normal, un-injured contralateral side of the patient. A stationary base reference, preferably established by at least two points, such as for line 662, is drawn on the pelvis, step 644, FIG. 25 , as shown in FIG. 27 for image 661′. The neck shaft angle 663 is measured, step 646, as shown in FIG. 28 as 138 degrees for image 661″. Typically, this step 646, FIG. 25 , includes identifying the longitudinal axis 664 of the femur, FIG. 28 , because the femoral line 664 serves as one “leg” of the angle 663 to be measured, with the other leg 666 established by the longitudinal axis of the femoral head. In some constructions, the femoral line 664 provides an important reference relative to the stationary base 662 so that the novel system and method can compensate for any difference in leg positions between images. It is not unusual for a leg to shift its orientation by 5 degrees to 15 degrees even when the leg is held in traction.

If scaling is desired, step 648, FIG. 25 , then it is considered whether a scaling object is present in the image, step 650. If yes, then the scaling object is identified, step 652, and the object size is entered, step 654. After those steps 652-654 are completed, or if no scaling object is found in step 650, the technique proceeds to the optional step of drawing a femoral line, step 656 shown in phantom, if additional analysis is desired beyond measuring the neck shaft angle in step 646 as described above. In any event, after the procedure of Flowchart P is completed, step 658, the technique returns to step 628 or step 634, FIG. 24 , in this construction.

FIG. 29 is a screen view with the left-hand image 661″ similar to FIG. 28 and a right-hand image 670 of the fractured side of the patient, showing marking of the lesser trochanter on the fractured side with a mark 672. FIG. 30 is a view similar to FIG. 29 showing marking of the obturator foramen of the fractured side with stable base line 674 in image 670′. FIG. 31 is a view similar to FIG. 30 showing measurement of neck shaft angle of 123 degrees on the fractured side as determined by measuring angle 676 between femoral axis 678 and femoral head axis 679. FIG. 32 is a combined image showing the fractured side image 670″ overlaid on the normal, inverted side image 661″. Stable base lines 662 and 674 are overlapped exactly in this construction.

Flowchart N, FIG. 33 , shows scaling and measurement for APEX TIP calculation as referenced in Flowchart L, step 610, FIG. 23 . The technique begins, step 700, and a fixation screw is inserted, step 702. An AP (Anterior-Posterior) X-ray-type photo is taken, step 704, and the AP image is scaled, step 706, by measuring the length or width of the screw as shown in FIG. 34 or by measuring another object of known size. The Tip-Apex distance is measured, step 708, such as shown in FIG. 35 . A lateral X-ray-type image is taken, step 710, and the lateral image is scaled, step 712, by measuring the screw as shown in the right-hand image of FIG. 36 ; alternatively, another object of known size is measured in the image and compared to the known measurement. The Tip-Apex distance is measured, step 714, in the lateral image such as shown in FIG. 37 . AP and lateral Tip-Apex distances are calculated, step 716, and the results are displayed such as shown in FIG. 38 . If the measurement is not satisfactory, step 718, then the technique returns in one construction to step 704 where replacement x-ray-type photos are taken and reanalyzed. Alternatively, or if re-analysis still does not reveal acceptable measurements, the surgeon repositions the screw as an alternative to step 702, and then the guidance resumes with step 704. Once acceptable, the procedure concludes, step 720, and the technique returns to step 612, FIG. 23 .

FIG. 34 represents a screen view 730 of an image of a screw 732 implanted through an implant 734 to treat an intertrochanteric hip fracture, showing measurement of the screw 732 with a longitudinal axis or length line 736, guided by reference squares 737, 738, 739 and 740 generated by the novel system in this construction. FIG. 35 is a view 730′ similar to FIG. 34 showing measurement of Tip-Apex distance 742 of 8.2 mm, guided by reference squares 743, 744, 745 and 746. FIG. 36 is a view 730′ similar to FIG. 35 plus a lateral view 750 on the right-hand side of the screen, showing measurement of the width of the screw 732 with line 752, guided by reference squares 753, 754, 755 and 756. FIG. 37 is a view similar to FIG. 36 showing measurement of Tip-Apex distance in the right-hand image 750′ with a Tip-Apex line 762 of 3.6 mm, guided by reference squares 763, 764, 765 and 766. FIG. 38 is a combined “Intertroch” view 770 showing both Tip-Apex Analysis and Neck Shaft Analysis. The Lateral Tip Apex measurement of 3.6 mm from view 750′ is added to the AP Tip Apex measurement of 8.2 mm from view 730′ to calculate a Combined Distance of 11.8 mm in this example. An overlay 780 of normal view 782 and fractured view 784 enables visual comparison, as well as image recognition and analysis, to calculate a Fractured Neck Shaft Angle of 123 degrees and a Normal Neck Shaft Angle of 133 degrees.

Guidance according to the parent application and the present invention can be provided for other anatomical regions such as wrists-hands, ankles-feet, and spinal anatomy including shoulders-arms. Flowchart Q, FIG. 39 , provides Intraoperative Guidance for Distal Radius Fracture Reduction in wrists according to another aspect of the parent application, referencing Flowcharts R and S. This procedure begins, step 800, and a choice is made whether to use radial inclination and length for reduction guidance, step 802. If yes, the procedure outlined in Flowchart R is followed, step 804. Once completed, or if those features are not selected at step 802, then use of Palmar slope for reduction guidance is considered at step 806. If selected, the procedure summarized by Flowchart S is followed, step 808. After completion, or if Palmar slope is not selected at step 806, then a report is generated and data stored, step 810. If the radial fracture reduction is not satisfactory, additional reduction is performed on the affected wrist, step 814, and the technique returns to step 802. Once satisfactory, the procedure ends, step 816.

Flowchart R, FIG. 40 , illustrates Radial Inclination and Length Reduction Guidance. An AP (Anterior-Posterior) image of the contralateral wrist is captured, step 822, and the contralateral image is flipped or inverted, step 824. The flipped contralateral image is processed utilizing the procedure outlined in Flowchart T, step 826, and an AP image is captured, step 828, for the affected wrist on which surgery is to be performed. The affected wrist image is processed utilizing the Flowchart T procedure, step 830, and the images are scaled and overlaid, step 832, such as illustrated in FIG. 51 . The affected and contralateral wrist radial inclination angles are calculated for comparison, step 836, and a decision whether to scale the images is made, step 838. If yes, the affected and contralateral wrist radial lengths are calculated for comparison, step 840. After such calculations, or if not selected, the procedure ends, step 842, and the technique returns to step 806, FIG. 39 .

Flowchart S, FIG. 41 , depicts Palmar Slope Reduction Guidance. This procedure begins, step 850, and an image of the contralateral, normal wrist is captured, step 852. The Palmar slope or tilt is measured, step 854, such as shown in FIG. 46 . A lateral image of the affected wrist is captured, step 856, and the Palmar slope of the affected wrist is measured, step 858, such as shown in FIG. 50 . Data and images for the affected and contralateral wrist are displayed, step 860, such as shown in FIG. 51 . The procedure ends, step 862, and the technique returns to step 810, FIG. 39 .

Flowchart T, FIG. 42 , shows identification of various anatomical features in the wrist and image processing. It commences, step 870, and a radial styloid is identified, step 872, such as shown in FIG. 44 . The ulnar styloid is identified, step 874, and the ulnar articular surface of the radius is identified, step 876. The longitudinal axis of the radius is identified, step 878, such as shown in FIGS. 43 and 47 for the normal and affected images, respectively.

A stationary base reference line is drawn across the carpal bones in this construction, step 880, such as shown in FIG. 45 . The radial inclination is calculated, step 882. If the image is to be scaled, step 884, then at least one scaling object is identified, step 886, and the object size is entered, step 888. Intraoperative scaling is applied to the image, step 890, and radial length is calculated, step 892. Once completed, or if scaling is not desired, the procedure ends, step 894, and the technique returns to steps 828 or 832 of FIG. 40 as appropriate.

FIG. 43 represents a screen view of an image 900 of a “normal” wrist of a patient with a line 900 drawn on the radius to indicate its central axis, guided by reference squares 904, 906, 908 and 910. FIG. 44 is a view 900′ similar to FIG. 43 with marking of selected anatomical points: Radial Styloid 912, guided by reference squares 914 and 916; Ulnar Border of Radius 918, guided by reference squares 920 and 922; and Ulnar Styloid 924, guided by reference squares 926 and 928. FIG. 45 is a view 900″ similar to FIG. 44 with a reference line 930 drawn across the carpal bones to provide a stationary base reference, as guided by reference squares 932, 934, 936 and 938.

FIG. 46 is a view of an image 940 of the normal wrist rotated to draw Palmar Tilt with longitudinal reference line 942, guided by reference squares 944 and 946, and lateral reference line 948, guided by reference squares 950, 952, 954 and 956, with a calculated Tilt of 7 degrees in this example.

FIG. 47 is a screen view with the left-hand image 900″ similar to FIG. 45 and a right-hand image 960 of the fractured side of the patient, showing marking of the central axis 962 of the radius on the fractured side, guided by reference squares 964, 966, 968 and 970. FIG. 48 includes a screen view image 960′ similar to image 960, FIG. 47 , showing marking of anatomical points on the fractured side: Radial Styloid 972, guided by reference squares 974 and 976; Ulnar Border of Radius 982, guided by squares 984 and 986; and Ulnar Styloid 992, guided by squares 994 and 996. FIG. 49 is a view 960″ similar to FIG. 48 with a reference line 1000 drawn across the carpal bones on the fractured side, guided by reference squares 1002, 1004, 1006 and 1008. In this constructions, a user touches one of the squares with a finger or a mouse cursor, and utilizes the square, such as by ‘dragging’ it, to move a marker to a desired location. This enables manipulation without blocking the location of interest.

FIG. 50 is a screen view with the left-hand image 940′ similar to FIG. 46 and a right-hand image 1010 of the fractured wrist rotated to draw Palmar Tilt with longitudinal reference line 1012, guided by reference squares 1014 and 1016, and lateral reference line 1020, guided by reference squares 1022, 1024, 1026 and 1028, with a calculated Tilt of 3 degrees in this example. FIG. 51 is a combined view as a Distal Radius Report according to the parent application, after the fractured side has been reduced, that is, after a surgical operation has been performed on the fractured side. The “Normal” image is an inverted contralateral image of the opposite wrist-bones of the patient. Although not illustrated, one or more plates or other implants may be utilized before and/or after analysis according to the parent application to reduce fractures as part of the surgical procedures to restore orthopaedic functionality at the surgical site. Upper-left Image 1030 is an AP Overlay of Radial Inclination to analyze radial bone fracture reduction with specific regard to angle in AP orientation. Contralateral or ‘Normal’ Radial Inclination is 2.4 degrees in this example and the Fractured Radial Inclination is 10.5 degrees. Radial inclination reference lines for the normal wrist-bones are shown in dashed lines while reference lines for the fractured wrist-bones are shown in solid lines. Preferably, an overlay line passing through the carpal bones in the each of images is utilized as stationary bases to generate images 1030 and 1050, although these overlay lines are not shown in images 1030 and 1050. Lower-left Image 1040 is an AP image of Reduced Fracture, after reduction has been analyzed by the system, to confirm image capture for future reference and digital record-keeping.

Upper-right Image 1050 in FIG. 51 is an AP Overlay of Radial Length to compare analysis of reduced radial bone location, with two sets 1052 and 1054 of substantially parallel lines, also with dashed lines for Normal and solid lines for Fractured wrist-bones. The distance between the two sets 1053, 1054 of lines indicates radial length measurement. Radial length lines are drawn using radial styloid and ulnar styloid location information. The quality of the fracture reduction is thereby analyzed; changes in radial length may indicate an orthopaedic problem. Image 1050 enables the user to visually inspect and analyze the quality of the fracture reduction and, therefore, numerical values are not provided in image 1050 in this construction. Lower-right Image 1060 is a Lateral View of Distal Radius Fracture after Reduction to provide Palmar Tilt analysis that compares fractured Palmar Tilt angle of 3 degrees in this example to the contralateral or ‘Normal’ Palmar Tilt angle of 7 degrees, although only the fractured wrist-bones are shown in image 1060 in this construction.

FIGS. 52 and 53 are described above.

In some constructions, a guidance system is provided to adjust the viewing area of one image on a screen to track actions made by a user to another image on the screen, such as to focus or zoom in on selected landmarks in each image. This feature is also referred to as an automatic ‘centering’ function: as a user moves a cursor to ‘mark’ a feature on one image, such as placing a point for a landmark or a stationary base on an intraoperative image, the other image on the screen is centered by the system to focus on identical points of interest so that both images on the screen are focused on the same anatomical site. FIG. 54 is a schematic combined block diagram and flow chart of an identification guidance module 1400 utilized in one construction to assist a user to select landmarks when comparing a post- or intra-operative results image, box 1402, with a reference image, box 1404. The module is initiated with a Start 1401 and terminates with an End 1418. When a visual landmark is added to a post-operative image, box 1406, the module 1400 locates all landmarks “l” on the pre-operative reference image, box 1408, and calculates the visible area “v” within the pre-operative image in which to scale, such as by using Equation 11: v=[maxx(1)−minx(1),maxy(1)−miny(1)]  EQ.11 The identical landmark on the pre-operative image is located and its center-point “c” is determined, box 1410. The identical landmark on the pre-operative image is highlighted in one construction to increase its visual distinctiveness, box 1414. The pre-operative image is centered, box 1410, and scaled, box 1412, such as by utilizing the following Equations 12 and 13, respectively: Center=c−(v)(0.5)  EQ.12 Scale=i/v  EQ. 13 The user manipulates one or more visual landmarks in the results image, box 1416, as desired and/or as appropriate. In some constructions, the user manually ends the guidance activities, box 1418 and, in other constructions, the system automatically discontinues the guidance algorithm.

In certain constructions, image recognition capabilities provide “automatic”, system-generated matching and alignment, with a reduced need for user input. Currently utilized image recognition provides automatic detection of selected items including: the spherical ball marker frequently utilized in preoperative digital templating; the acetabular cup in digital templates and in trial prosthetics; and the Cobb Angle line, also referred to as abduction angle.

Note that “PostOp” typically indicates post-insertion of a trial prosthesis during the surgical procedure, and is preferably intra-operative. The PostOp image can also be taken, and analysis conducted after a “final” prosthesis is implanted. “PreOp” designates an image preferably taken before any surgical incision is made at the surgical site. In some situations, the image is taken at an earlier time, such as a prior visit to the medical facility and, in other situations, especially in emergency rooms and other critical care situations, the “PreOp” image is taken at the beginning of the surgical procedure. Ball markers BM are shown but are not utilized for alignment because ball markers can move relative to the patient's anatomy. Further PreOp and PostOp icons are provided to adjust viewing features such as contrast and transparency. Preferably, at least one icon enables rotation in one construction and, in another construction, “swaps” the images so that the underlying image becomes the overlying image.

In certain constructions, intraoperative analysis and guidance is also provided to a user for one or more individual components of an implant such as an acetabular cup of a hip implant. System 1500, FIG. 55 , analyzes the orientation, including abduction angle and anteversion, of an acetabular cup in this construction. System 1500 includes Image Selection Module 1502, Image Recognition Module 1504, Landmark Identification Module 1506, Acetabular Cup Bottom Identification Module 1508 and Abduction Angle and Anteversion Calculation Module 1510 in this construction, with system operation and technique described below in relation to FIGS. 56-59 .

FIG. 56 is an image 1520 of an acetabular cup 1522 positioned in the left acetabulum of a patient with a circle 1524 drawn around its outer hemispherical surface to provide diameter information for the component. In some constructions, a user initiates component analysis by touching a finger or a stylus to the “Diameter Information” field 1532. At any time, as described in relation to FIG. 59 below, the user preferably is able to return to a previous action such as by touching or clicking another field 1532, for example “Mark Greater Trochanter”. In one construction, an image recognition algorithm in Image Recognition Module 1504 automatically operates to identify the acetabular cup 1522 in the image 1520 of FIG. 56 and surround it with the circle 1524, bracketed by small guide dots 1526, 1528, as indicated by the prompt “Diameter information” 1532 at the top of image 1520. In some constructions, the guide dots or squares serve as “navigation handles” to enable the user to manipulate one or more features designated by the handles, such as by touching or clicking and dragging the handles to move the designated features. This screen 1520 relates to step 1608 in flowchart X, algorithm 1600, FIG. 59 below. If the initial, auto-generated circle is not acceptable, then the user manually adjusts the position and/or size of circle as appropriate, step 1610.

FIG. 57 is an image 1540 similar to that of FIG. 56 with two lines 1542 and 1560 drawn to calculate abduction angle. The user accesses screen 1540, having a heading or prompt 1541 of “Calculate Abduction Angle”, for example, to fit in the abduction angle landmarks for calculation. The terms “abduction” and “abduction angle” are also known as “inclination”. The “User positions neutral axis” step 1612 in flowchart X, FIG. 59 below relates to screen 1540, FIG. 57 , in which neutral axis line 1560 is placed to touch the two ischial tuberosities of the pelvic girdle. Guide squares 1562, 1564, 1566 and 1568 enable the user to manipulate the neutral axis line 1560. Abduction angle line segment 1542 is auto-positioned across circle 1524 using image recognition, step 1614, FIG. 59 , wherein the system automatically detects where the acetabular cup 1522 is positioned, FIG. 57 , and the system places the line segment 1542 across the abduction angle on the cup as accurately as it can do so. The abduction line segment 1542 preferably is a diameter line of the circle; when segment 1542 is extended virtually by the system to intersect the neutral axis line 1560, the abduction angle is generated and measured at that intersection. In one construction, the abduction line defaults to about 45 degrees from the neutral line 1560 until more accurate auto recognition occurs. The guide square “handles” 1544, 1546, 1548 and 1550 around the abduction line segment 1542 enable the user to rotate the abduction line segment 1542, but the abduction line continues to look like a diameter line so that it remains properly aligned with the actual orientation of the acetabular cup 1522.

During the “User adjusts abduction angle manually if required”, step 1616, FIG. 59 , the user can use the navigation handles 1544, 1546, 1548 and 1550, FIG. 57 , after the image recognition has run, to make the abduction angle substantially perfect. In “System calculates and displays abduction angle”, step 1618, the neutral axis 1560 is mathematically compared to the abduction line segment 1542 to determine the angle. In this construction, the abduction angle data of “32°”, for example, is displayed in lower right field 1543 in FIG. 57 .

If the user wants anteversion information, then at step 1620, FIG. 59 , “YES” is selected and arcs 1572, 1574, FIG. 58 , are positioned that identify the bottom of the acetabular component 1522 in step 1622. The system then calculates and displays the anteversion angle, which relates to the z-plane rotation of the acetabular component 1522. Some users may only want to use abduction angle data and will then skip anteversion at step 1620 and proceed to step 1626 where it is decided whether to modify placement of the acetabular component intraoperatively. If “yes” is selected, then the algorithm proceeds as indicated by path 1628 to re-position the acetabular component, step 1604 et seq. Once the user is satisfied with the placement, then algorithm 1600 terminates, step 1630, and the system resumes from where step 1602 was initiated.

FIG. 58 is an image 1570 similar to that of FIG. 57 with arcs drawn at the bottom of the acetabular cup 1522 to assist calculation of anteversion in the z-plane. Image 1570 includes a vertically-oriented “slider control” 1580 in this construction, with vertical line 1582 and a movable setting knob 1584, to enable a user to easily increase or decrease the size of arcs 1572 and 1574. Vertical slider control 1580 increases or decrease the size of the arcs 1572, 1574. These arc lines 1572, 1574 are mirror images of one another relative to the abduction line segment 1542 and are used to identify the location of the bottom of the cup 1522 in the image 1570. Sliding knob 1584 all the way to ‘0’ will cause the arcs 1572, 1574 to overlay the abduction angle line segment 1542. Sliding all the way to ‘100’ will cause the arcs to overlay the existing circle 1524. This relates to “Arcs are positioned that identify bottom of acetabular component”, step 1622, FIG. 59 . Guide handles 1569 and 1571, FIG. 58 , are provided for at least one of arcs 1572 and 1574 as described in relation to FIG. 59 below.

During the next step 1624, “System Calculates and Displays Anteversion”, any updates that are applied to the arcs 1572, 1574 via slider 1580 will lead to re-calculation and updated display of anteversion value such as “14°” in field 1594. Note how the guide handles 1573, 1575, 1577 and 1579 in FIG. 58 allow the precise location of the abduction angle to still be updated if required, via manipulation of abduction line segment 1542, which is especially useful if the user continues positioning the arcs, to more closely achieve actual orientation values. Soft-button icons 1590 and 1592 for “Abduction Angle” and “Anteversion”, respectively illustrated with solid and dashed lines, serve as “toggles” when touched or clicked by a user to selectively activate which screen features may be manipulated by the user. In one construction, the functionality of one or more of guide handles 1573, 1575, 1577 and/or 1579 is altered according to which of icons 1590 and 1592 is selected, to adjust features relating to abduction and anteversion, respectively.

FIG. 59 is a flowchart of anteversion and abduction analysis by the modules of FIG. 55 . Flowchart X, algorithm 1600, FIG. 59 , is activated when a user selects “Cup Check” icon or text to initiate cup analysis. In some constructions, this prompt will persist somewhere on the navigation screen throughout the workflow. This is a ‘forked’ or loop workflow which will start, step 1602, from wherever it is initiated and then return to the same place upon finish of the fork. First action of “Position Acetabular Component”, step 1604, is conducted by a surgeon. The “acetabular component” in this situation of “pre-stem insertion”, can be a number of components: a standard acetabular cup, a reamer, or a trial acetabular cup. The actual component analyzed depends on what the surgeon would like to have analyzed by the novel system.

After initial installation of a component, a prompt such as “Take image of acetabular component”, step 1606, guides the user to take a picture of an AP Pelvis view with implanted cup, such as illustrated in FIG. 56 . Alternatively, a prompt of “Select from Library” or other guidance can be provided to the user, in a manner similar to other techniques described above. Steps 1608-1616 are described above in relation to FIGS. 56-57 in which a circle is established around the acetabular cup and diameter information of the circle is generated.

Initiation of step 1618, FIG. 59 , “System calculates and displays abduction angle”, causes two lines to appear, the pelvic reference line 1560 and abduction angle line segment 1542, FIG. 57 , in a manner that is similar to abduction angle analysis on simulated AP Pelvis described above. Pelvic reference line 1560 is also referred to as the “neutral axis” line, step 1612. Alternatively, a “T” or other geometric shape appears on the screen when a soft button “toggle” is activated. The pelvic reference line 1560 is a line across image 1540, placed by default horizontally on image 1540 and approximately 75 percent of the way down the image (in a y-coordinate system). This is similar to the Cobb Angle functionality discussed above.

For the abduction angle line, the user draws the line segment 1542 as precisely as possible across the cup 1522. In some constructions, an image detection/recognition algorithm is provided to assist this process. Abduction angle preferably is calculated in real time and displayed in this step. In one construction, the abduction angle continues to be displayed to the user throughout the additional steps in this process. Determining the abduction angle is a straightforward calculation, calculated as the angle between the neutral axis 1560 and abduction line segment 1542, FIG. 57 , similar to how it works in AP Pelvis reconstruction. When a user such as a surgeon wants to get return to operating on the patient and not continue with anteversion, then the user selects “No” in steps 1620 and 1626, FIG. 59 , the system “saves” the calculated information, and returns to where algorithm 1600 was initiated while the surgeon resumes surgery on the patient.

For step 1622, the user works with two inner arcs to analyze anteversion. The system keeps the acetabular component circle visible from the earlier step, but it is now non-modifiable. The abduction line preferably is removed from the visual display. Preferably the circle appears to be “paper thin” (and even slightly transparent) in this screen. End points 1526 and 1528, FIG. 57 , are added on each side of the circle 1524 where the abduction line 1542 transected the visual circle 1524.

Now the system proceeds to modify the two arcs 1572 and 1574, FIG. 58 , that are contained within the circle 1524. Each arc is on one of the sides of the abduction line segment 1542. These arcs are mirror images of one another relative to the abduction line. Each arc should default to a distance of 35% of the circle radius; for example, if the radius is 28 mm (or 28 x pixels, whatever it may be, as scaling is not needed for this process), the distance of the midpoint of the arc from the abduction line should be approx. 9 mm (or 9 x pixels). One of the arcs, such as the lower one 1574, has navigation controls or handles 1569 and 1571 on it, or directly at the center of the arc 1574. The other arc will move in tandem with this arc in a “captured” manner. Navigation control for this object will be a slider control (similar to a transparency control, but longer and vertical). As described above for one construction, at a setting of 100 percent on the slider, the arc will be directly on the cup, while at 0 percent on the slider, the arc will be directly on the abduction angle line. Preferably an initial default setting of 35 percent is provided. Also, preferably, the slider control 1580 is movable on the screen, and is initially positioned by the system in the middle of the screen.

Anteversion is calculated in real-time and displayed as arcs 1572 and 1574 are modified. A larger display is desired for both abduction angle and anteversion. Anteversion is calculated in one construction according to Liaw et al., “A New Tool for Measuring Cup Orientation in Total Hip Arthroplasties from Plain Radiographs”, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research No. 451, pp. 134-139 (2006) currently available at: http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/˜fuh/personal/ANewToolforMeasuringCupOrientation.pdf. As described on Page 136 of the Liaw et al. article, FIG. 2 -B shows calculation of ‘true anteversion’ angle: Point F is known, as the midpoint of the diameter line, and Point E can be identified from circle surround the cup. The highest point on the cup is point E, which has the same x-coordinate as Point F and a y-coordinate equal to (y coordinate of Point F+radius of circle diameter). Point G is a point on the ‘arc’ horizontal from Point F. Angle Beta(t), which represents true anteversion, can be calculated from this data.

Finally, the user can Capture/Save this analysis for later review and then ‘Go Back’ to standard workflow. High Level Workflow Functionality Summary: preferably, the system provides the user with the ability to Save, Exit Cup Check, return to previous screen, and view after the final overlay. In some constructions, the system captures anteversion on the reconstructed AP Pelvis as well, in addition to the abduction angle calculation that already exists. A soft button with a designation such as “Calculate Anteversion” is provided for the user to click or touch at the end of ‘abduction angle’ process in simulated AP. If selected, then process continues, else process stops.

In some techniques, the Abduction Angle can be altered if user decides to keep a physical handle attached to the acetabular cup. The handle will appear on an x-ray image or fluoro image, and can be used to determine abduction. A perpendicular line to the cup handle line that intersects the Ischial Tub line will produce a very accurate Abduction Angle. Finally, in Flowchart X, FIG. 59 , is the user satisfied with the results? If not, the user can reposition the acetabular cup, retake a fluoro shot, and begin the process again as shown in the flowchart. Thus, a novel software-controlled solution is achieved, anatomically disconnected from the patient, to provide intraoperative data that improves clinical decision-making during surgery without increasing trauma to the patient.

In certain constructions, a system and method according to the present invention includes an inventive alternative methodology for analyzing intraoperative leg length and/or offset changes using a different application of the stationary base, intraoperative scaling and anatomical landmark identification techniques. Referred to herein as ‘Reverse Templating”, the system and method combines the use of intraoperative data, gathered from intraoperative image analysis, with intraoperative templating on a preoperative ipsilateral image. The process begins in some constructions by (1) acquiring preoperative ipsilateral and intraoperative images and (2) scaling and aligning these images by using identifiable features on the pelvis to serve as a stationary base, together with intraoperative data of the acetabular component. The system initially displays the preoperative and intraoperative images next to one another, with the system aligning and scaling the images relative to one another by using the identified stationary bases in each image. The absolute scale, that is, objective scaling according to a measurement system such as in millimeters, at least for the intraoperative image, is determined by visually identifying the prosthetic implant device itself while entering the known metric size for at least one dimension of the device. Both images are scaled in some constructions using their respective stationary bases and, in other constructions, each image is scaled independently, such as by using a ball marker for the preoperative image and the known dimension of the implant for the intraoperative image.

In certain preferred implementations of this Reverse Templating method, the user is guided to identify one or more landmark points (i.e. the tear drop anatomical feature of the pelvis) on each image and is then guided by the system to position templates that directly overlay the acetabular component and femoral stem implants visible in the intraoperative image. In other words, a first, acetabular template is superimposed over the acetabular component and a second, femoral template is superimposed over the femoral stem of the implant during certain preferred implementations of the present overlay technique. This template overlay in the intraoperative image does not calculate any offset or leg length data directly, but it provides other intraoperative data (i.e. abduction angle) that enables the system and user to precisely position the acetabular component and femoral stem templates on the preoperative image. The use of intraoperative data in the preoperative image, as gathered from overlaying templates in the intraoperative image, transforms this approach from an “estimation” technique to one that provides extremely precise calculations of intraoperative offset and leg length changes. The technique's use of templates additionally allows the surgeon to proactively analyse how intraoperative changes to implant selection will affect leg length and offset.

One system that implements this intraoperative Reverse Templating technique is shown in Intra-operative Analysis Module 1850 in FIG. 67 . The method for one construction of the system is depicted in flowchart segments 1870 and 1872, FIGS. 68A and 68B, that comprise a Flowchart U depicting Intraoperative Templating Flow. The system and method that implements this Intraoperative Templating technique generates images such as shown in FIGS. 60-66 .

In one construction, novel intra-operative Analysis Module 1850, FIG. 67 , includes Image Selection Module 1852 which communicates with a Rotation and Scaling Module 1860 that preferably includes an optional Stable Base Identification Module 1854, shown in phantom. In this construction, Template Input Module 1852 further communicates with an optional Longitudinal Axis Identification Module 1856, shown in phantom, that provides femoral axis identification in this construction which is particularly useful if the first and second images are not taken in virtually the same position, that is, along the same viewing angle, and a Landmark Identification Module 1858. All three of modules 1860, 1856 and 1858 provide inputs to Intraoperative Template Placement Module 1862; in this construction, Stable Base Identification Module 1854 generates a stable base, also referred to as a stationary base formed from two or more points selected on a patient's anatomy, as part of Rotation and Scaling Module 1860, whose results are then provided to Intraoperative Template Placement Module 1862. In one construction, Module 1862 facilitates placement of digital templates of acetabular and femoral components onto a preoperative image using intraoperative data including templating data from the intraoperative image. After templating, information is provided to the Differential Analysis Module 1864 for further calculations and analysis, including offset and leg length calculations in some constructions. One or more of the modules 1852-1864 can interface with a display or other interactive communication with a user. Another optional component is an Intraoperative Templating Module 1863, shown in phantom, which provides further processing of the output of Intraoperative Template Placement Module 1862, such as performing “what if” planning analysis or to modify one or more of the digital templates, before providing the results to Differential Analysis Module 1864.

All references to “module” in relation to FIGS. 68A-69 refers to the modules of Intraoperative Analysis Module 1850, FIG. 67 , with “ID” referring to “Identification”. Further, the order in which the preoperative, reference image and the intraoperative, results image are marked or scaled among steps 1876 to 1902 can be interchanged in other implementations. In other alternative constructions, analysis is conducted utilizing a contra-lateral image instead of or in addition to an ipsa-lateral image as described below.

The method begins in one construction with initiation, step 1874, FIG. 68A, and a user-selected preoperative ipsilateral hip image is opened for display, step 1876, by Image Selection Module 1852. The system guides the user to indicate whether the image is a right or left hip. A screen view 1700, FIG. 60 , depicts the selected image 1702 of the right side of a patient's hip prior to an operation, with pubic symphysis PS, obturator foramen OF and right femur F_(R). The image 1702 can be acquired by directly interfacing with an imaging system or otherwise by taking a picture of a radiographic image using an iPhone camera or similar technology. A label 1718 of “PreOp” indicates that it is a pre-operative image.

The method continues with the preoperative hip image being processed, step 1878, by the technique of flowchart 1880, FIG. 69 , which is a Flowchart Y showing functions applied to the pre-operative hip image for Intraoperative Templating of Flowchart U. The specific functions include identification of a ‘stable base’ (sometimes referred to as a ‘stationary base’) according to the parent application, identification of the femoral axis, and identification of the greater trochanter in this construction.

At step 1882, FIG. 69 , a reference line is drawn by the Stable Base ID Module 1854 across the bony pelvis, as illustrated by the “stable base” line 1704 in FIG. 60 which is shown extending from the teardrop TD to the lower portion of the pubic symphysis PS. A femoral axis line 1706, representing the longitudinal axis of the femur, is then identified in step 1884, FIG. 69 , by the Longitudinal Axis ID Module 1856. A femoral landmark such as the greater trochanter is identified, step 1886, by Landmark ID Module 1858; in other constructions, one or more alternative femoral landmarks such as the lesser trochanter are identified. As guided by step 1886, guide squares 1710 and 1712, FIG. 60 , assist the user in placing a marker 1714 on the greater trochanter GT as a landmark or reference point. In some constructions, the “stable base” line 1704, “femoral axis” line 1706, and marker 1714 on the greater trochanter (or other femoral landmark) may be automatically placed in appropriate locations by the system's image recognition capabilities and then may be modified by the user. In other constructions, the user is prompted to place these lines and markers without system intervention.

Continuing with step 1890, FIG. 68A, the technique captures the operative hip image, that is, an image is obtained of the patient's hip during surgery, utilizing the Image Selection Module 1852. The operative hip image may be captured through various methods, such as through a direct connection with a fluoroscopy machine, a DICOM file upload, or by the user taking a camera picture of the radiographic image using an iPad or other mobile computing device. After capturing the operative hip image, the acetabular component is identified in step 1892 by the Rotation and Scaling Module 1860, such as shown in FIG. 61 . The intraoperative image is scaled, step 1894, by entering the size of the acetabular component into the system, which is processed by Rotation and Scaling Module 1860.

FIG. 61 represents a screen 1720 viewable by the user during a novel surgical procedure guided according to the parent application showing two images in split screen view, the left-hand image 1702′ representing a pre-operative view similar to FIG. 60 , and the right-hand image 1722 representing an intra-operative view with a circle 1724 placed around the acetabular component 1730 of an implant 1732 to enable rescaling of that image. In some constructions, the system attempts to automatically place the circle 1724 around the acetabular component 1730 using image recognition algorithms. In other constructions, the user is prompted to place the circle around the acetabular component without system guidance. The user may use guide squares 1726 and 1728, if required, to alter the size and position of circle 1724 so that it precisely encircles the acetabular component 1730. In one construction, the user enters the diameter of circle 1724, such as “54 mm”, using data entry box 1727. This enables the system to generate absolute scaling in the intraoperative image by taking the diameter in pixels of the acetabular component and combining that with the known diameter in millimeters. Other prompts to guide the user include the choice of soft-key 1740 for “Use Ball Marker” and soft-key 1742 for “Use Ruler”, to allow the user to accomplish intraoperative scaling using other anatomical features or observable devices if desired.

The method continues with step 1896, FIG. 68A, by applying Flowchart Y, FIG. 69 , to the operative hip, including steps 1882-1886 as described above, in order to identify the “stable base”, “femoral axis” and greater trochanter in the operative hip image, as illustrated in FIG. 62 . The shoulder of the femoral implant is identified, step 1898, in the intraop image by Landmark ID Module 1858, which is also illustrated in FIG. 62 .

FIG. 62 is a schematic screen view 1750 similar to FIG. 61 with pre-operative image 1702″ and indicating placement of a mark 1760 of the lateral shoulder 1761 of the prosthesis 1732 of the right-hand, intra-operative image 1722′, as guided by guide squares 1762 and 1764. Also shown is the greater trochanter having mark 1756 as a femoral landmark and a stable base line 1754 connecting the tear drop TD to the lower portion of the pubic symphysis PS. Alternative constructions may use a stable base line 1754 that connects a different set of 2 or more anatomical landmarks across the pelvis, but the landmarks must be placed on consistent points across the preoperative and intraoperative images. Similarly, alternative constructions may replace the greater trochanter with a different femoral landmark (i.e. lesser trochanter) that can be identified in both preoperative and intraoperative images. In some constructions, the system will attempt to auto-generate placement of the mark 1760 at the lateral should 1761 of the prosthesis, the mark 1756 on the greater trochanter, and stable base 1754 across pelvic landmarks, and then allow the user to modify placement. Other constructions will prompt the user to determine placement of this data without automated guidance.

The identification of consistent stationary bases in the preoperative image and intraoperative images can be combined with the absolute scaling data in the intraoperative image to apply absolute scaling to the preoperative image. To accomplish this, the method continues in step 1900, FIG. 68A, by scaling the preoperative image in pixels by Rotation and Scaling Module 1860, which scales the lines across the bony pelvis in both the preoperative and intraoperative images so that they are of identical size in pixels, such as by using stable base line 1704, FIG. 61 , and stable base line 1754, FIG. 62 .

Continuing with step 1902, FIG. 68A, absolute scaling is applied to the preoperative image by using the known size of the acetabular component in the intraoperative image. Because both images are scaled according to an identical stationary base, the absolute scale ratio in the intraoperative image, determined by acetabular component diameter, can be applied to the preoperative image. This unique technique provides precise scaling to the preoperative image by using objects of known size in the intraoperative image and applying this scaling to the preoperative image. The result is that a significantly more precise absolute scaling can be determined in the preoperative image, as compared to traditional preoperative image scaling techniques that utilize ball markers or similar techniques.

Alternative constructions may alternatively apply absolute scaling to the preoperative and intraoperative images directly in each image, and without the need for a stationary base. For example, each image may be scaled by a ball marker or other scaling device, known magnification ratios of a radiographic device, or direct measurements of anatomical points (such as a direct measurement, via callipers, of the extracted femoral head, which can be used to scale the preoperative image).

Alternative constructions may also replace the ‘stationary base’ with various other techniques that could be used to scale and align the preoperative and intraoperative images relative to one another. One example of such a construction would involve overlaying two images and displaying them with some transparency so that they could both be viewed on top of one another. The user would then be prompted to rotate and change their sizing, so that the pelvic anatomy in the two images were overlaid as closely as possible.

A “side by side” display is generated by the Rotation and Scaling Module 1860, step 1904, which is consistently rotated and scaled based on the stable base line across the bony pelvis. In some constructions, a single image that combines preoperative and intraoperative picture renderings side by side will be displayed. Other constructions will maintain the preoperative and intraoperative images as separate images. All constructions will rotate and scale the images relative to one another using the stationary bases across the pelvis.

After aligning the preoperative and intraoperative images, the method continues with step 1906, FIG. 68B, with the user or system drawing an acetabular cup template directly on top of the implant in the intraoperative image, such as shown in FIG. 63 . The acetabular cup template is placed to match the actual abduction angle by Intraoperative Templating Module 1862. FIG. 63 is a schematic screen view 1770 similar to FIG. 62 with a reference rectangle 1772, also referred to as a “box” or “frame”, indicating an acetabular component template 1774, with a central point 1775, placed directly above the acetabular component of the prosthesis on the intra-operative femur in the right-hand view. In some constructions, the system combines known anatomical data (i.e. the circle 1724 placed around the acetabular component in FIG. 61 ) and image recognition to generate the initial placement of the acetabular component template on the intraoperative image. In an alternative construction, the acetabular component template is placed at a default abduction angle and modified by the user. In either construction, the user can modify the template abduction angle to match the actual acetabular component abduction angle by using movement control icon 1776, also referred to as a “rotation handle”, similar to the icon 527 shown in FIG. 21 above. This assists “touch” or “click and drag” control used to facilitate repositioning and adjustment of the template 1774 relative to the image of the acetabular component 1730 of implant 1732. In one construction, icon 1777 is clicked or touched to “activate” rectangle 1772, template 1774 and/or movement control icon 1776 to enable movement thereof by the user. Additional information is provided to the user by fields 1778 such as “Size 54 mm”, “Type Standard”, and “Offset 0” as illustrated. Markers 1780 and 1782 have been placed in images 1702′″ and 1722″, respectively, to designate the location of tear drop TD in each image. In some constructions, the system may automatically generate markers 1780 and 1782 because the teardrop TD has already been identified, for example in a situation when the teardrop is used to create a stationary base and can be readily identified.

In step 1908, FIG. 68B, the system positions the acetabular cup template in identical position, relative to the pelvis, in the preoperative image as compared to the placement on the intraoperative image described above. This is illustrated in FIG. 64 using known teardrop locations in the pre- and intra-operative images.

FIG. 64 is a schematic screen view 1790 similar to FIG. 63 but with the acetabular template 1774′, with a central point 1775′, now re-positioned on top of the femoral head in the preoperative view 1792. The acetabular template positioning in the preoperative image, as shown in this figure, is auto-generated by the system using intraoperative image data gathered from the placement of the acetabular template in the intraoperative image. Specifically, the system calculates the x and y distances from the teardrop to the acetabular prosthesis in the intraoperative image display, and auto-generates the acetabular template position in the preoperative image by maintaining the distance from the teardrop to the acetabular template in the preoperative image. The system also maintains the abduction angle obtained by maintaining the acetabular template abduction angle that was analysed in the intraoperative image. This process ensures that the acetabular template is placed in the preoperative image in a position, relative to the pelvis, that precisely matches the acetabular component position in the intraoperative image. The method effectively transforms the templating exercise from one of preoperative estimation and planning to one of precision-guided intraoperative analysis. The acetabular component placement is facilitated by the scaling and alignment of the preoperative and intraoperative images described above.

In alternative constructions, a physical device, sensors, calliper measurement of directly observable anatomical landmarks, or some other form of mechanical and electrical hardware may be used to create image scaling as a substitute for scaling based on the acetabular component. One example of an alternative construction (although not as precise) would be to measure the extracted femoral head using callipers, and then to scale the image by marking the femoral head in the preoperative image. In this method, absolute scaling is initially created in the preoperative image, and then propagated to the intraoperative image by scaling and aligning consistent stationary bases.

The process continues with step 1909, FIG. 68B, by Intraoperative Templating Module 1862, with the system or user positioning a femoral stem template directly on top of the femoral stem in the intraoperative image. As with the acetabular component template process described above, this step is used to determine intraoperative data that will be used later in the method. FIG. 65 is a schematic screen view 1800 similar to FIG. 64 , demonstrating positioning of the femoral stem template in the intraoperative image. The figure shows the acetabular component outline 1774′ overlaid on the femoral head on the left-hand, preoperative image 1801. The user selects the femoral stem template used in surgery, identified for this implant 1732 as “Depuy Corail AMT Size: Size 9, Offset: COXA VARA, Head: 5”, and the system renders the template for this model on the screen. The user or system overlays the template image 1804, within rectangle 1802 with a movement control icon 1806, of the prosthesis 1732, directly on top of the observed femoral component in the intra-operative image 1803. Initial calculations of Offset Changes and Leg Length Changes are not yet relevant, but are displayed in one corner of screen 1800 by indicia 1812 including “Offset Changes: −272.0 mm”, and “Leg Length Changes: −12.7 mm”, along with “Abduction Angle: 45.0”. Control icon 1808 for the acetabular cup and an icon 1810 for the femoral stem template 1802 and 1804 are provided in another portion of screen view 1800.

Note dashed 1820 extending from the neck of the implant 1732 over the greater trochanter, and a parallel dashed line 1822 which touches the shoulder of implant 1732. (The user identified the shoulder of the femoral prosthesis 1732, also referred to as the superolateral border of the femoral prosthesis, in the intraoperative image illustrated in FIG. 62 above.) The system draws both lines 1820 and 1822 perpendicular to the femoral axis and is guided by user positioning of markers that identify the greater trochanter and shoulder implant.

In step 1910, FIG. 68B, the system identifies the distance between the shoulder of the implant and the greater trochanter along the femoral axis line, as shown in FIG. 65 . In one construction, this process is supported by dashed reference lines 1820 and 1822 which are generated to be perpendicular to femoral axis line 1752, identified earlier in the process and displayed in FIG. 66 . The calculated distance between lines 1820 and 1822, along the femoral stem axis, is intraoperative data that will be applied to the placement of the femoral stem template in the preoperative image.

In step 1912, the system takes the calculated distance described above and generates a line in the preoperative image that is perpendicular to the femoral axis line and is the same distance away from the greater trochanter, as shown in FIG. 66 . For step 1914, the system places the femoral stem template in the preoperative image, using the line generated in step 1912.

FIG. 66 is a schematic screen view 1830 similar to FIG. 65 showing the femoral stem template 1804′, within a rectangle 1802′, placed on the pre-operative image 1801′ superimposed and aligned with the femur F_(R). The system automatically repositions the femoral stem template 1804′ in preoperative image 1801′ by using intraoperative data gathered from the placement of the same template in the intraoperative image. Specifically, the system draws guidance lines and determines the implant position on the femur in the preoperative image through the following steps:

-   -   The system draws dashed line 1832 through the greater trochanter         point (as previously identified by a marker) and perpendicular         to the femoral axis in the preoperative image (which may be         different than the intraoperative femoral axis).     -   The system takes the calculated distance, along the femoral         axis, between the greater trochanter and the shoulder of the         implant from the intraoperative image. The system generates         dashed line 1834 in the preoperative image below the greater         trochanter line 1832, and perpendicular to the femoral axis,         based on the distance calculated in the intraoperative image.     -   Line 1834 is generated as a visual guide for the user or system         to position the femoral stem template by placing the shoulder of         the femoral stem template on this line.     -   The system calculates the difference between the greater         trochanter and the shoulder of the prosthesis in the         intraoperative image along the femoral axis and perpendicular to         the femoral axis. The system then generates the location of the         femoral stem template in the preoperative image by replicating         the distance relative to the greater trochanter and placing the         shoulder of the prosthetic at that location.     -   Additionally, the femoral stem is automatically rotated so that         it maintains consistent angle relative to the femoral axis in         both images. For example, if the femoral axis is 15 degrees in         the intraoperative image and 10 degrees in the preoperative         image, the system will automatically rotate the femoral stem         template by 5 degrees when it moves it to the preoperative         image. Finally, the femoral stem template may be adjusted,         either by the user or automatically by the system, to match the         location of the femoral canal (i.e. movement of the femoral stem         template perpendicular to the femoral axis).     -   Having combined intraoperative data with preoperative imaging,         the system now precisely calculates, in step 1916 and         Differential Analysis Module 1864, the offset and leg length         differences based on the positioning of the femoral stem and         acetabular cup templates in the preoperative image.     -   Finally, the user can now modify, in step 1918, implant template         selections in the system to perform “what if analysis” and to         proactively analyze how intraoperative implant changes will         affect offset and leg length calculations, allowing         intraoperative changes and decision making to be based on         calculations made even before inserting a different implant         during surgery. The system or user will then place the new         implant selection using dashed line 1834 and other guidelines,         and will automatically calculate anticipated offset and leg         length changes by combining the template technique with the         intraoperative data being used.

The Offset and Leg Length change calculations are displayed in one corner of screen 1830 by indicia 1812′ including “Abduction Angle: 45.0”, “Offset Changes: 4.2 mm”, and “Leg Length Changes: −0.2 mm”. Also identified is “Pinnacle Acetabular Cup Size: 54 mm” and “Depuy Corail AMT Size: Size 9, Offset: COXA VARA, Head: 5” for implant 1732 in this example. Control icon 1808′ for the acetabular cup and an icon 1810′ for the femoral stem template 1802′ and 1804′ are provided in another portion of screen view 1830. In one construction, dashed reference lines 1832 and 1834 are generated to be perpendicular to femoral axis line 1706′.

In some constructions, the system will begin with the JointPoint Anterior process and finish with the Reverse Templating system. Most of the data required to do Reverse Templating can be carried over from JointPoint Anterior by the system so that very few steps are required by the system to process the Reverse Templating technique.

FIG. 70 is an overlay image 2000 of a preoperative hip image 2001 and an intraoperative hip image 2003 having a trial implant 2002 in a hip with the acetabular component 2004 transacted by stationary base lines 2006 and 2007 extending between a first point 2008 on the obturator foramen OF and a second point 2010 on the anterior inferior iliac spine AIIS of the ileum. Also shown are two error analysis triangles 2020 (solid lines) and 2030 (dashed lines). Circles 2022 and 2032 in this construction represent a landmark point on the greater trochanter in images 2001 and 2003, respectively. Image 2000 is a representation of preoperative and intraoperative hip images 2001 and 2003 overlaid according to stationary base lines 2006 and 2007, respectively. Three identical pelvic points 2024, 2026, 2028 and 2034, 2036, 2038 in images 2001 and 2003, respectively, have been identified, with the system 200, FIGS. 4C-4F, generating triangles 2020 and 2030 for each image as represented by FIG. 70 . The triangles 2020 and 2030 can be visually compared to analyze the error in the anatomic area containing the stationary bases which, in this case, is the pelvis.

A numerical confidence score or other normalized numeric error analysis value may also be calculated and displayed in the system by calculating the distance between points, comparing them to the length of the triangle vectors, and then normalizing the data, possibly using a log or other such nonlinear algorithm. The visual display and/or numerical confidence score provides efficacy analysis in the construction. In other words, error analysis and correction is provided in some constructions for at least one image, such as providing a confidence score or other normalized numeric error analysis, and/or a visual representation of at least one error value or error factor, such as relative alignment of one or more geometric shapes, e.g. triangles, or symbols in two or more images.

In some constructions of the various alternative systems and techniques according to the present invention, visual and/or audible user instructions are sequentially generated by the system to guide the user such as “Draw line along Pubic Symphysis”. Guidance for surgery utilizing other types of implants, and for other surgical procedures, including partial or total knee or shoulder replacements and foot surgery as well as wrist surgery, will occur to those skilled in the art after reading this disclosure. Also, other types of medical imaging using energy other than visible light, such as ultrasound, may be utilized according to the present invention instead of actual X-rays. Moreover, if a computer interface tool, such as a stylus or light pen, is provided to the user in a sterile condition, then the user can remain within a sterile field of surgery while operating a computing device programmed according to the present invention.

Hip- and femur-related constructions of the present system and method will calculate intraoperative changes in offset and leg length, for a selected implant having at least one center of rotation, using a preop and intraop image. To accomplish this, the system requires two consistently scaled images, the generation of at least one stationary point on the stationary anatomic region (such as the pelvis) in both images, and identification of the center of rotation of the prosthetic in the intraop image. The center of rotation in the intraop image can be most simply identified by overlaying an acetabular template, or other digital annotation, that is used to identify the center of rotation.

The system and method may make use of additional steps, including identification of the femoral implant using a digital template or other digital annotation, including generation of at least one landmark point on the non-stationary anatomic region (such as the femur) in both images, to generate data about how changing the inserted implant, that is, replacing or modifying the implant in at least one dimension, will affect offset and leg length. This additional data enables a surgeon to understand how changing an implant intraoperatively would affect offset and leg length prior to actually changing the implant.

As described in more detail below in relation to FIGS. 71A-78 , a landmark based Reverse Templating process according to the present invention begins by acquiring (i) at least one of a preoperative ipsilateral or an inverted contralateral image (“preop image”), and (ii) an intraoperative image. The images are scaled and aligned using one of a plurality of techniques and then visually displayed, preferably side by side. The system generates at least one stationary point on the stationary anatomic region in both images (such as identification of the teardrop point on the pelvis in both images), possibly with user guidance in certain constructions.

On the intraoperative image, the system generates a digital representation such as a digital template or other digital annotation, such as a digital line having at least two points, e.g. a line representing a longitudinal axis or a diameter of an implant or a bone, or a digital circle, which identifies the actual acetabular component placement and a corresponding center of rotation for that component. Additionally, the system optionally, but preferably, generates a digital template or other representative digital annotation that identifies the actual femoral stem component placement in the intraop image.

The femoral stem and acetabular component templates, or representative annotations, generated on the intraoperative image are connected at the center of rotation, replicating the actual positioning of the femoral stem and acetabular components. The system may optionally generate at least one landmark point on the femoral anatomy, consistently identified in both images (such as a point on the greater trochanter). In one construction, the system may use this landmark point to calculate estimated changes to offset and leg length for possible replacement prosthetics if a surgeon were to change femoral stem implant selection. The landmark point may also be used to position (i) a femoral component image, (ii) an “intraop overlay image” including intraop images of at least a portion of the intraop prosthesis and at least a portion of the bone of the patient in which the prosthesis is implanted, as described below in relation to FIG. 74 , (iii) a femoral template (that is, a digital template of at least the intraop femoral stem, which may also include a digital template of the acetabular cup) or (iv) surrogate digital annotation in the preop image.

In one construction, the system calculates the vector in the intraoperative image between the stationary pelvic tear drop point as an “origin” and cup location, as determined by the center of rotation of the acetabular component or representative template, as a terminal point. The term “vector” is utilised herein with the standard meaning of a Euclidean vector having an initial point or “origin” and a terminal point, representing magnitude and direction between the origin and the terminal point. The system then positions an acetabular component template or representative digital annotation, such as a digital line or digital circle, in the preop image by replicating this vector.

Some systems and methods according to the present invention can generate a femoral stem template or representative digital annotation in the preop image using information from the generated annotations and templates on the intraop image. In one construction, the system accomplishes this without generating a femoral component template or representative annotation in the intraop image. Instead, the system calculates the vector between the generated landmark point on the femoral anatomy (preferably the greater trochanter) and the center of rotation of the acetabular component template. The system may also analyse positional differences between the preop and intraop femur, relative to the stationary pelvis, and rotate the vector to account for any difference.

In FIG. 62 , femoral axis lines 1761 and 1706 show a representation of how the system or user may identify femoral position. The system can calculate the angle difference between these lines and use this information to transform the vector, referred to herein as a “transformed vector”. The system then places the femoral component template or representative annotation thereof in the preop image by replicating the calculated or transformed vector between the center of rotation and the femoral landmark point in the preop image. In some constructions, the calculated or transformed vector is also rotated if the femur is in different orientations in the preop and intraop images.

Preferred system constructions according to the present invention will generate a femoral component template or digital annotation that identifies the femoral stem placement in the intraop image. The system can position the femoral component image, template or representative digital annotation in the preop image by using at least one of a plurality of techniques, such as: (1) calculating the vector between an identified femoral landmark point and a digital femoral template or representative digital annotation thereof in the intraop image, rotating it to account for any differences in femoral positioning between the preop and intraop images, and then positioning the digital femoral template or representative digital annotation according to the transformed vector; and/or (2) overlaying an image of the actual intraop prosthetic femoral stem, preferably with the intraoperative femur image (the intraop femoral stem and femur also referred to as an “intraop overlay image”), directly on top of the preop femur, to replicate in the preop image the actual intraoperative position of the femoral template in the intraop image. The latter may be accomplished by automated system techniques such as image recognition, user placement of the images, or a combination of both.

Using actual intraoperative data to create a template on a preoperative image enables a precise intraoperative calculation of offset and leg length that is vastly more accurate than the traditional ‘estimation’ of these parameters previously achieved using standard preoperative templating techniques.

Finally, the system may optionally generate a chart that estimates anticipated changes in leg length and offset, such as chart 2520, FIG. 76 , if the surgeon were to replace or otherwise modify the femoral stem prosthetic intraoperatively. As an alternative to a generated chart, the system may generate a recommended femoral stem change based on a user inputting the surgeon's desired offset and leg length parameters. If the surgeon wants to lengthen the leg by 7 millimeters and not change offset, for example, the system will calculate leg length and offset for all femoral stem options contained in the system, and would present the femoral stem selection to the user that would come closest to accomplishing this. The system generates the results for this chart or recommendation by generating a vector between at least one identifiable point on the femoral anatomy, such as the greater trochanter point identified previously, and an assumed stationary point on the femoral template, such as the femoral stem shoulder, for example as described below in relation to stem shoulder point 2435, FIG. 76 . The data calculated in the chart assumes that if the surgeon implants a different femoral stem, the position of the identified point on the femoral template will not change. The stem shoulder is an ideal point for such an approximation.

In one construction, the process begins in the flowchart RT in FIG. 71A by acquiring, step 2200, either a selected preoperative ipsilateral image, or a selected inverted contralateral image. Whichever image is selected is referred to herein as a “first, reference image” or “preop image”. The process continues with acquisition of the intraop hip image, step 2201. Image acquisition in steps 2201 and 2202 is performed by the Image Capture module 2300, also referred to as an Image Selection Module, of reverse templating system 2290, FIG. 72 . Acquisition of these images can be performed in a variety of ways, such as a direct connection to a c-arm fluoroscopy unit, image acquisition by taking a picture of a radiographic image, file upload, or other similar techniques. If an inverted contralateral image is used as a ‘preop’ image, the contralateral image may be acquired and then inverted within the software, or otherwise it may be flipped in another system and then input to image capture module 2300.

In step 2202, FIG. 71A, the system determines whether the preop and intraop images have been pre-scaled and aligned according to pelvic anatomy. Consistent scaling and alignment may be previously performed in this construction using a variety of approaches. For example, a software system residing on a digital fluoroscopy system may have been used to align and scale the images prior to image acquisition by this system. Alternatively, the images may already be scaled and aligned because the surgeon took images with the patient and radiographic system in identical position.

If the images have not been either scaled or aligned, the system can scale, or align, or scale and align the images in step 2203. Consistent scale and alignment in this step are accomplished by the optional Image Scaling and Alignment Module 2301, FIG. 72 , shown in dashed lines, which may accomplish these operations in various ways. One method is to use stationary bases (i.e. pelvic reference lines), along with identification and scaling of the acetabular cup in the intraop image, as described in the earlier construction of Reverse Templating and visually illustrated in FIG. 15 , for example. An alternative approach is to guide the user in overlaying preop and intraop images, with transparency such as described below in relation to FIG. 74 , so that the user can scale and align the images manually. In common alternative constructions, the input to the system may already have applied consistent alignment or scale to the images, but not both. For example, the absolute scaling of both the preop and intraop images may be determined using known magnification of an imaging system or independent scaling using software, but the images may not be aligned. The system may make use of image recognition to auto-align images, or else provide functionality, such as the use of stationary bases described above, that guides the user or system to align and/or scale the preop and intraop images.

The method continues in step 2204 with Landmark Identification Module 2302, FIG. 72 , identifying at least one “stationary” point on the pelvis in both the preop and intraop images. In a preferred construction, a point in each image will be placed on the pelvic teardrop, a particularly useful pelvic reference point because it is easily identifiable and near the implanted acetabular cup, which helps to reduce the propagation of any scaling error within the system. In various constructions, the user is either prompted to identify the point on the teardrop, or otherwise the system auto-identifies the point location using image recognition or other technology and then allows the user to modify the point placement.

In step 2205, FIG. 71A, the templating Module 2303, FIG. 72 , identifies the center of rotation by identifying the acetabular cup in the intraop image using a digital template or alternative digital annotation. This can be implemented in a variety of ways. In a preferred approach, the system auto-recognizes the acetabular cup in the intraop image and places a digital template directly on top of it, with the user able to adjust the placement of the template. The digital template may be selected based on the known size of the inserted cup. Alternative constructions may instead make use of digital annotations to identify the center of rotation. The digital circle annotation 392 in FIG. 12 represents how a digital circle may be positioned by the user or system to encircle the acetabular component, with the midpoint of this circle identifying the center of rotation.

Alternative constructions may similarly make use of a semicircle or digital line, such as line 530 in FIG. 22 , which can be drawn by the system or user to identify the base of the acetabular cup. In this construction, the center of rotation corresponds to the midpoint of the digital line. As an alternative to auto-identification of the cup, the system may simply direct the user to place the template or surrogate annotation directly on top of the acetabular implant. Placement of a template or alternative digital annotation in this manner enables the system to generate the vector between the acetabular cup and the pelvic reference point (e.g. teardrop 2470, FIG. 73 ) identified in step 2204.

In step 2206, Templating Module 2303, FIG. 72 , identifies the location of the prosthetic femoral stem in the intraop image using a digital template or representative annotation. In a preferred implementation, the user will select the known manufacturer, model, and size of the femoral implant, and will then position the template directly over the actual implant in the intraop image. Some implementations of the system may also auto-recognize the femoral stem and attempt to auto-position the template. In a preferred construction, the femoral and acetabular templates will be locked together along their center of rotation, so that offset and leg length readouts on the intraop image are both set to 0.0 mm, matching known data about interlocking femoral and acetabular implants.

In Step 2207, the Landmark Identification Module 2302, FIG. 72 , is used to identify at least one consistent femoral landmark point in both the preop and intraop images. In a preferred construction, a single identifiable point will reside on the greater trochanter, such as landmark points 2417 and 2472 in FIG. 73 .

FIG. 73 is a schematic screen view 2400 of a preoperative image 2410 on the left, with a pelvis 2412, obturator foramen 2414 and a femur 2416, and an intraoperative image 2420 on the right with a digital template 2422, also referred to as a femoral template 2422, superimposed on an actual “trial implant” prosthesis 2424 inserted within the femur 2417, which is the same bone as femur 2416, left-hand preop image 2410, after the femoral head has been removed intraoperatively. Stationary tear drop point 2415, identified in step 2204, is marked above obturator foramen 2414 in the preop image 2410 and stationary tear drop point 2470, also identified in step 2204, is marked above obturator foramen 2425 in the intraop image 2420. Landmark point 2417, identified in step 2207, is placed on the greater trochanter of femur 2416, image 2410, and landmark point 2472, also identified in step 2207, is placed on the greater trochanter of femur 2427, image 2420. Digital template 2422 lies within a frame 2426 moveable by a user via movement control icon 2428 in one construction, and includes a digital acetabular cup template 2430 placed over an acetabular component 2431 and a femoral stem template 2432 positioned over a femoral component 2433, connected at a center of rotation 2434. Acetabular cup template 2430 was positioned on acetabular component 2431 in step 2205, and femoral stem template 2432 was positioned over femoral component 2433 in step 2206.

Acetabular cup control icon 2440 permits a user to activate the digital cup 2430, if desired, so that the user may improve its alignment with the actual implant in the image. Control icon 2442 indicates that digital box 2426 containing the femoral template 2422 is activated and responsive to user manipulation. Selecting the “x” within the activated control icon 2442 will delete the femoral template 2422. Details window 2450 is expanded to show selected parameters such as Abduction Angle, Leg Length Changes, and Offset Changes for the specified trial implant. Compare Stems window 2452 is closed in this view.

In Step 2208, FIG. 71B, the Analysis Module 2304, FIG. 72 , calculates the vector between the acetabular template, or other surrogate annotation, and the pelvic point (e.g. teardrop) in the intraop image. The Templating Module 2303 uses this information to generate placement of the acetabular cup template in the preop image by replicating the intraop vector in the preop image. This process ensures that the vector between the teardrop (or other pelvic points) and the acetabular cup is consistent in both the preop and intraop images. Effectively, this process uses intraoperative placement data to precisely position the acetabular template in the preop image. In one construction, Templating Module 2303 overlays a femoral template on femoral implant image 2424 i, FIG. 74 . Like the earlier construction of Reverse Templating, the general process is using intraoperative data to place templates on a preoperative image, transforming an estimation process to one that precisely analyzes intraoperative offset and leg length data.

In Step 2209, FIG. 71B, the Analysis Module 2304, FIG. 72 , takes the femoral template (or representative digital annotation) from the intraop image and propagates its position, relative to femoral anatomy, to the preop image. In this particular construction, a ‘cutout’ (exact copy) of the femur from the intraop image is moved to the preop image and overlaid digitally as an intraop overlay image. The system does this by connecting the preop image and the intraop ‘cutout’ of the femur using the femoral landmark identified on the greater trochanter. The system provides the user with the ability to rotate the femoral overlay image around the greater trochanter point. This enables the system to precisely align the preop and intraop femurs, even when they are positioned differently relative to the pelvic anatomy.

Various implementations may provide different functionality to position the intraop image of the femur on top of the preop image. For example, the system may auto-identify points on the femoral anatomy in each image and attempt to overlay femoral anatomy automatically in the preop image.

Once the intraop image has been positioned, the system generates the femoral template, positioned on the intraop image in step 2206, so that its position relative to the intraop cutout is consistent with how the template was positioned relative to the intraop image. The system then removes the intraop ‘cutout’ and leaves the generated template on the preop image.

One construction of the system also provides ‘+’ and ‘−’ buttons, such as buttons 2464 and 2466, FIG. 74 , that allow the user to manipulate the size of the intraop overlay image, so that it can precisely match the preop femur. Use of this scaling functionality is generally not required because the images have already been scaled consistently, but the technique preferably accounts for any alignment and scaling differences between the preop and intraop femurs relative to the pelvis. Alignment differences in particular may exist between the preop and intraop image, because the system has aligned the images according to the pelvis but the femoral axis in each image may change. Addressing any differences in this step ensures that offset and leg length are calculated correctly.

FIG. 74 shows the described construction that implements step 2209. A screen view 2400 a of images of the intraoperative actual trial implant 2424 and femur 2427 of FIG. 73 superimposed in FIG. 74 as an “intraop overlay image” on the preoperative image 2410 of FIG. 73 to form a combined image 2410 a in FIG. 74 . The intraop overlay image, with femoral prosthesis image 2424 i including cup 2431 i and femoral stem component 2433 i, and femur image 2427 i, lies within a frame 2460 controlled by movement control icon 2462. Although center of rotation 2434 i is illustrated in FIG. 74 , it is not needed at this stage in the procedure. Plus symbol 2464 and minus symbol 2466 enable a user to increase or decrease magnification, allowing the user to manipulate the size of the intraop overlay image, so that it can be made to precisely overlay and align with the preop femur 2416, even when there are scaling inconsistencies between the preop and intraop images. Image 2410 a includes the stationary pelvic tear point 2415 above obturator foramen 2414 and a landmark point 2472 i on the greater trochanter of intraop femur 2427 i, which matches landmark point 2417 of femur 2416.

Screen 2400 a includes acetabular cup control icon 2440 a and femoral template control icon 2442 a plus an overlay control icon 2480. The control icon 2480 indicates that the intraop overlay image is activated on top of the preop image. Selecting the “x” in overlay control icon 2480 enables the user to stop and re-initiate the overlay process. Selecting control icon 24440 a or 2442 a enables the user to return to the previous steps of positioning the acetabular cup template or femoral template on the intraop image. Windows 2450 a and 2452 a are shown in a “collapsed” or closed condition. A transparency adjustment control 2500 includes a button 2502 movable by a user between contrast positions 2504 (lighter) and 2506 (darker) to lighten or darken the intraop overlay image within frame 2460.

Once the femoral template and acetabular template, or equivalent digital annotations, have been placed on the preop image such shown in FIGS. 75 and 76 , the system continues to step 2210 in which Analysis Module 2304, FIG. 72 , calculates offset and leg length changes using the digital templates in the preop image. To do this, the system analyses the difference between the acetabular cup template center of rotation and the femoral stem template center of rotation. Leg length is calculated as the distance between these points along the axis of the femur, which is identifiable by the straight line running through the center of the femoral template. Offset is calculated as the distance between these points along the axis perpendicular to the femur. The use of intraoperative data to guide template placement in the preoperative image enables offset and leg length calculations that are vastly more accurate than the traditional preoperative ‘estimation’ of these parameters.

FIG. 75 is a screen view 2400 b of the intraoperative digital template 2422 superimposed on the preoperative image 2410 b on the left and the same digital template 2422 and actual trial implant 2424 on the right in the intraop image 2420 b. FIG. 76 shows screen view 2400 c, which is the screen view 2400 b of FIG. 75 with both “Details” and “Compare Stems” windows expanded in FIG. 76 .

Also shown in both FIGS. 75 and 76 is the center of rotation 2434 ii of acetabular cup template 2430 ii on the left, PreOp images 2410 b, 2410 c, and superimposed cup center of rotation 2434 on the right, PostOp images 2420 b, 2420 c. Femoral stem center of rotation 2435 ii of femoral template 2432 ii is shown in the left, preop images 2410 b and 2410 c as slightly mis-aligned or offset from the cup center of rotation 2434 ii; of course, the actual femoral stem center of rotation is the same as the cup center of rotation 2434 in intraop images 2420 b and 2420 c. A femoral stem shoulder point 2510 is shown in preop images 2410 b, 2410 c with a shoulder line 2512.

Finally, in Step 2211, FIG. 71B, the Analysis Module 2304, FIG. 72 , generates a chart or other user-perceptible information that estimates how leg length and offset will change if the surgeon changes the currently inserted femoral stem. For example, image 2400 c, FIG. 76 , shows a chart 2520 with selected parameters for the current, actual implant 2424 highlighted as the third entry “5.8 mm, 0.8 mm” in the left, “Standard Collared” column, indicating that current Standard Collared implant 2424 adds 5.8 mm to the patient's natural, preop leg length and an offset of 0.8 mm. Estimated offset and leg length calculations are calculated for alternative femoral stem implants using known intraoperative data, and displayed in chart 2520.

One or more of modules 2300, 2302, 2303 and 2304 of FIG. 72 can be combined in certain constructions, such as indicated by dashed line 2306 showing a combined operation module for Templating Module 2303 and Analysis Module 2304. Also illustrated in phantom is a Display 2308. Other modules and components shown and described elsewhere in this application can also be combined or rearranged with this system 2290 or other illustrated systems as will be readily apparent, after reviewing this application, to those of ordinary skill in coding and programming. For example, module 2306 can include system 2616, FIG. 78 .

The process of calculating offset and leg length of alternative implants using known intraoperative data, but prior to their insertion, is a unique system and method according to the present invention, such as described by flowchart RTC, FIG. 77 , which is implemented by system 2616, FIG. 78 . The method begins in step 2600 with identification of an implant “fixed” point on the femoral stem template that is assumed to remain fixed (i.e. reproducible, repeatedly re-locatable, and/or shared in common) if an alternative prosthetic were to be inserted. Shoulder point 2510 in FIG. 76 illustrates the identification of a suitable implant fixed point in this construction.

To implement step 2600, FIG. 77 , Database Retrieval Module 2622, FIG. 78 , retrieves the coordinate of the fixed point relative to the template, and Calculation Module 2620 calculates its position relative to the preoperative image based on the placement of the femoral stem template. In one construction, initial input to Calculation Module 2620 is received from Image Scaling and Alignment Module 2301, Landmark Identification Module 2302, and Templating Module 2303, FIG. 72 , so that the images and digital implant representations are at least scaled relative to each other; image alignment is not necessary for the process illustrated by Flowchart RTC.

In step 2602, FIG. 77 , Calculation Module 2620, FIG. 78 , calculates the vector between the identified fixed point on the femoral template and the previously identified greater trochanter femoral landmark in the preop image, such as by using shoulder point 2510, shoulder line 2512 and greater trochanter point 2417 illustrated in preop images 2410 b, 2410 c in FIGS. 75, 76 .

In Step 2604, Database Retrieval Module 2622 retrieves the alternative femoral stem templates from the database along with the fixed-point coordinates, which in this construction will be the equivalent fixed shoulder point in each template. The database may be located on either a server, the local device on which the software runs, or both.

The process continues in step 2606 with the Calculation Module 2620 replicating, for each alternative femoral stem template, the calculated vector for the existing template between the shoulder point on the femoral template and greater trochanter landmark.

In step 2208, Templating Module 2624 uses the data calculated in step 2606 to simulate the position for each alternative femoral stem template. The simulated position for each alternative implant template, also referred to herein as a virtual alternative template position, assumes that the fixed point location for each alternative femoral stem template does not change relative to the greater trochanter, and also assumes that the angle of each alternative prosthetic, relative to the femur, will not change.

In step 2210, Analysis Module 2626 uses the simulated positioning of each alternative femoral stem template to generate offset and leg length data for each alternative template. It generates this data by analysing the vector between the acetabular template center of rotation and each alternative femoral stem center of rotation.

Finally, in step 2212, Output Module 2628 generates the chart or other user-perceptible information, as shown in chart 2520, FIG. 76 , that estimates how leg length and offset will change if the surgeon changes the currently inserted femoral stem. In an alternative construction, the system may provide a recommended femoral stem change based on the surgeon's desired offset and leg length parameters instead of a general chart, effectively “dialing in” a “best fit” recommendation for the desired change, thereby enabling the surgeon to optimize implant selection.

Although specific features of the present invention are shown in some drawings and not in others, this is for convenience only, as each feature may be combined with any or all of the other features in accordance with the invention. While there have been shown, described, and pointed out fundamental novel features of the invention as applied to one or more preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood that various omissions, substitutions, and changes in the form and details of the devices illustrated, and in their operation, may be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. For example, it is expressly intended that all combinations of those elements and/or steps that perform substantially the same function, in substantially the same way, to achieve the same results be within the scope of the invention. Substitutions of elements from one described embodiment to another are also fully intended and contemplated.

It is also to be understood that the drawings are not necessarily drawn to scale, but that they are merely conceptual in nature. Other embodiments will occur to those skilled in the art and are within the scope of the present disclosure. 

What is claimed is:
 1. A method for surgical restoration of orthopaedic functionality of a joint of a patient, the method comprising: acquiring a preoperative image of the joint, wherein the preoperative image shows at least (i) a portion of a skeletal bone and (ii) a portion of an articulating bone that articulates with respect to the skeletal bone at the joint; acquiring an intraoperative image of the joint after an initial implant has been implanted, wherein the intraoperative image shows at least (i) the portion of the skeletal bone, (ii) the portion of the articulating bone, (iii) a first center of rotation of a skeletal bone component of the initial implant while the skeletal bone component is implanted in the skeletal bone, and (iv) a second center of rotation of an articulating bone component of the initial implant while the articulating bone component is implanted in the articulating bone, wherein the first and second centers of rotation are co-located in the intraoperative image; generating, on the intraoperative image, a first digital landmark corresponding to a first anatomical feature of the portion of the skeletal bone shown in both the intraoperative and preoperative images; determining, with a processor, a first spatial relationship between the first digital landmark and the first center of rotation shown in the intraoperative image; generating, on the intraoperative image, a second digital landmark corresponding to a second anatomical feature of the portion of the articulating bone shown in both the intraoperative and preoperative images; determining, with the processor, a second spatial relationship between the second digital landmark and the second center of rotation shown in the intraoperative image; generating, on the preoperative image, a third digital landmark corresponding to the first anatomical feature of the portion of the skeletal bone shown in both the intraoperative and preoperative images; determining, with the processor, a first location in the preoperative image that satisfies the first spatial relationship relative to the third digital landmark; generating, on the preoperative image, a fourth digital landmark corresponding to the second anatomical feature of the portion of the articulating bone shown in both the intraoperative and preoperative images; determining, with the processor, a second location in the preoperative image that satisfies the second spatial relationship relative to the fourth digital landmark; determining, with the processor, a difference between the first and second locations in the preoperative image to calculate at least one of (i) an offset between the portion of the articulating bone shown in the intraoperative image and the portion of the articulating bone shown in the preoperative image, (ii) a length differential between the portion of the articulating bone shown in the intraoperative image and the portion of the articulating bone shown in the preoperative image, or (iii) a combination thereof; and implanting a final implant in the joint of the patient, the final implant selected in response to (i) the offset, (ii) the length differential, or (iii) the combination.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein determining the first spatial relationship comprises: superimposing a first digital implant representation of the skeletal bone component on the intraoperative image, wherein the first digital implant representation includes an indication of the first center of rotation; aligning the first digital implant representation with the skeletal bone component shown in the intraoperative image; and determining the first spatial relationship by comparing the indication of the first center of rotation to the first digital landmark when the first digital implant representation is aligned with the skeletal bone component.
 3. The method of claim 2, wherein determining the second spatial relationship comprises: superimposing a second digital implant representation of the articulating bone component on the intraoperative image, wherein the second digital implant representation includes an indication of the second center of rotation; aligning the second digital implant representation with the articulating bone component shown in the intraoperative image; and determining the second spatial relationship by comparing the indication of the second center of rotation to the second digital landmark when the second digital implant representation is aligned with the articulating bone component.
 4. The method of claim 3, further comprising: superimposing the first digital implant representation of the skeletal bone component on the preoperative image such that the indication of the first center of rotation of the first digital implant representation satisfies the first spatial relationship relative to the third digital landmark; and superimposing the second digital implant representation of the articulating bone component on the preoperative image such that the indication of the second center of rotation of the second digital implant representation satisfies the second spatial relationship relative to the fourth digital landmark.
 5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: selecting an alternative articulating bone component usable with the skeletal bone component of the initial implant, the alternative articulating bone component being sized differently from the articulating bone component of the initial implant such that a third center of rotation of the alternative articulating bone component would have a third spatial relationship relative to the second anatomical feature if the alternative articulating bone component was implanted in the articulating bone, the third spatial relationship being different from the second spatial relationship; determining the third spatial relationship based on the second spatial relationship and one or more known size differences between the articulating bone component of the initial implant and the alternative articulating bone component; determining a third location in the preoperative image that satisfies the third spatial relationship relative to the fourth digital landmark; and determining a difference between the first and third locations in the preoperative image to recalculate the offset, or the length differential, or the combination thereof that would result from implanting the alternative articulating bone component instead of the articulating bone component of the initial implant.
 6. The recommending use of the alternative articulating bone component in response to the recalculated offset, length differential, or combination thereof being less than that calculated for the articulating bone component of the initial implant.
 7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating, on the intraoperative image, a first digital line that contacts third and fourth anatomical features of the portion of the skeletal bone shown in both the intraoperative image and preoperative image; and generating, on the preoperative image, a second digital line that contacts the third and fourth anatomical features of the portion of the skeletal bone shown in both the intraoperative image and preoperative image.
 8. The method of claim 7, further comprising, in response to determining that the intraoperative image is not orientationally aligned relative to the preoperative image, orientationally aligning the intraoperative image with the preoperative image based on at least the first and second digital lines.
 9. The method of claim 7, further comprising, in response to determining that the intraoperative image has a different scale from the preoperative image, scaling at least one of the intraoperative and preoperative images to a common scale based on at least the first and second digital lines, wherein the first and second digital lines each terminate at the third and fourth anatomical features.
 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the skeletal bone is a pelvis of the patient, the articulating bone is a femur, the skeletal bone component of the initial implant is an acetabular cup, and the articulating bone component of the initial implant includes a femoral stem.
 11. The method of claim 10, wherein the first anatomical feature is a feature of an obturator foramen of the patient.
 12. The method of claim 11, wherein the second anatomical feature is a feature of the greater trochanter on the femur of the patient.
 13. The method of claim 1, wherein: the first spatial relationship is determined as a first vector measured from the first digital landmark to the first center of rotation shown in the intraoperative image; and the second spatial relationship is determined as a second vector measured from the second digital landmark to the second center of rotation shown in the intraoperative image.
 14. The method of claim 5, further comprising generating a chart with a plurality of offsets, or length differentials, or combinations thereof that would result from implanting each of a plurality of alternative implant components instead of the components of the initial implant.
 15. The method of claim 1, wherein: the method further comprises generating, on the preoperative image, a longitudinal axis line along a length of the articulating bone; calculating the offset comprises calculating a separation between the first and second locations in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal axis; and calculating the length differential comprises calculating a separation between the first and second locations in a direction parallel to the longitudinal axis.
 16. The method of claim 1, further comprising generating, on the intraoperative image, a circle around the skeletal bone component of the initial implant to determine the first and second centers of rotation.
 17. A system for facilitating surgical restoration of orthopaedic functionality of a joint of a patient, the system comprising: a memory configured to store images, a display configured to display images, and a processor coupled to the memory and to the display, the processor being configured to: acquire, from the memory, a preoperative image of the joint, wherein the preoperative image shows at least (i) a portion of a skeletal bone and (ii) a portion of an articulating bone that articulates with respect to the skeletal bone at the joint; acquire, from the memory, an intraoperative image of the joint after an initial implant has been implanted, wherein the intraoperative image shows at least (i) the portion of the skeletal bone, (ii) the portion of the articulating bone, (iii) a first center of rotation of a skeletal bone component of the initial implant while the skeletal bone component is implanted in the skeletal bone, and (iv) a second center of rotation of an articulating bone component of the initial implant while the articulating bone component is implanted in the articulating bone, wherein the first and second centers of rotation are co-located in the intraoperative image; generate, on the intraoperative image, a first digital landmark corresponding to a first anatomical feature of the portion of the skeletal bone shown in both the intraoperative and preoperative images; determine a first spatial relationship between the first digital landmark and the first center of rotation shown in the intraoperative image; generate, on the intraoperative image, a second digital landmark corresponding to a second anatomical feature of the portion of the articulating bone shown in both the intraoperative and preoperative images; determine a second spatial relationship between the second digital landmark and the second center of rotation shown in the intraoperative image; generate, on the preoperative image, a third digital landmark corresponding to the first anatomical feature of the portion of the skeletal bone shown in both the intraoperative and preoperative images; determine a first location in the preoperative image that satisfies the first spatial relationship relative to the third digital landmark; generate, on the preoperative image, a fourth digital landmark corresponding to the second anatomical feature of the portion of the articulating bone shown in both the intraoperative and preoperative images; determine a second location in the preoperative image that satisfies the second spatial relationship relative to the fourth digital landmark; determine a difference between the first and second locations in the preoperative image to calculate at least one of (i) an offset between the portion of the articulating bone shown in the intraoperative image and the portion of the articulating bone shown in the preoperative image, (ii) a length differential between the portion of the articulating bone shown in the intraoperative image and the portion of the articulating bone shown in the preoperative image, or (iii) a combination thereof; display, on the display, at least one of: (i) the offset, (ii) the length differential, or (iii) the combination; receive an input indicating a surgeon's selection of a final implant in response to (i) the offset, (ii) the length differential, or (iii) the combination; and display, on the display, guidance for the surgeon to implant the final implant in the joint of the patient.
 18. The system of claim 17, wherein to determine the first spatial relationship comprises to: superimpose a first digital implant representation of the skeletal bone component on the intraoperative image, wherein the first digital implant representation includes an indication of the first center of rotation; align the first digital implant representation with the skeletal bone component shown in the intraoperative image; and determine the first spatial relationship by comparing the indication of the first center of rotation to the first digital landmark when the first digital implant representation is aligned with the skeletal bone component.
 19. The system of claim 18, wherein to determine the second spatial relationship comprises to: superimpose a second digital implant representation of the articulating bone component on the intraoperative image, wherein the second digital implant representation includes an indication of the second center of rotation; align the second digital implant representation with the articulating bone component shown in the intraoperative image; and determine the second spatial relationship by comparing the indication of the second center of rotation to the second digital landmark when the second digital implant representation is aligned with the articulating bone component.
 20. The system of claim 19, wherein the processor is further configured to: superimpose the first digital implant representation of the skeletal bone component on the preoperative image such that the indication of the first center of rotation of the first digital implant representation satisfies the first spatial relationship relative to the third digital landmark; and superimpose the second digital implant representation of the articulating bone component on the preoperative image such that the indication of the second center of rotation of the second digital implant representation satisfies the second spatial relationship relative to the fourth digital landmark. 